What’S Happening In Corinth With Rite Aid?

Super helpful! Thank you. It really makes you think about how much focus Paul also had on unity for the church members and it’s relationship to how difficult it must have been to be a Christian there. This focus is a great clue for Christians now about how we can remain strong in our faith by being united in the cause of Christ. Excellent resource!

This was a big topic for me coming out of nearly 10 years of legalistic fundamentalism where head coverings and having long hair were mandatory for the women of our church. After many years of prayer about these verses God was gracious and showed me that this teaching on long hair and head coverings has no parallel under the OT type and shadow of Christian doctrine. Sound Christian doctrine is found in the OT blueprint such as sacrificial lamb, baptisms and out of servitude into a place of liberty and provision. This answer to these verses while utterly thrilling and liberating left me with a major headache. If they are not to be acted upon why are they there. After a couple of weeks of prayer ( so quick ) I had a verse coming to me 1 Cor 7 1….. now concerning the things whereof you wrote unto me !!!!!!! NOW….concerning the things YOU WROTE UNTO ME…… Paul covered these things because the corinthians had written to him about them. And then at the end of his discourse on their questions he finishes with his statement …..nevertheless we have no such customs neither do the churches of God. WOW!!!

Hair “falling down around” is ….the actual GREEK. Unrestrained. Men with long hair falling down around were effeminate homosexuals. “Queens”in that society. Greeks were known for young men accompanying older men as a sexual partner. Totally unacceptable for a believer in Messiah. Women with unrestrained hair were prophesying in the manner of the pagans. I think it was women called the Furies in that region that went to the caves with their hair loosened to have no sign of any authority or restraint to prophecy under the influence of drugs & the toxic vapours inside some caves. They used demonic ritual to attain spiritual insight. Again unacceptable to a beliver in Christ to be practising. Common knowledge then & not now. The Corinthians were syncretic in practice & Paul was rebuking that.

Apostle Paul commends them for keeping the ordinance. That’s all I need to be convinced it’s the perfect will of God. The Holy Word of God tells it just like we men and women need to understand it. There’s nothing like Holiness. There’s plenty of Christians who should get down to it before it’s too late. Without Holiness no one will see the Lord. Let’s uphold God’s Word by not adding to it and not taking away from it and by doing it. Then we will not be ashamed at His appearing. PS, I call this generation the “I don’t have to” generation. I was born in 1964 and my parents took me to their Lutheran church. ALL the ladies wore hats. They covered their heads. Every one of them. When I went to school all the girls wear dresses, including me. All women wore dresses for every day wear. For nearly 6,000 years women wore dresses, little girls wear dresses, women covered their heads, until this generation that says: “We don’t have to”. It actually shocks me that for thousands of years something was normal and carried out without question and understood perfectly and then this generation completely leaves it all. May God have mercy, it’s not just clothing it’s the heart. The hearts and minds and wills of this generation is unholy. They’re teaching is unholy too. Their lives are unholy and the world-wide church is unholy as well. This is the “We don’t have to” generation. It’s not going unnoticed by God.

Good article. As far as the admonition about women should cover their hair in church and men should remain uncovered,the simplist explanation I’ve ever heard I’d that men should not dress like women and vice versa.Even today many cover hair in Middle East and the Mediterranean area.I don’t think this injunction about hats applies to anything but church.

Well Mister, if men take off their hat in reverence when the go to church, I as a women put on my veil in reverence, because I cannot take off my hair. My hair is my husband’s glory, so I cover outside the house or practically all day because I pray during the day. Just like Jewish women have done for thousands of years. One must understand that Paul actually was a jew and a pharisee, and that may be the reason he talked about head covering to those in corinth, because they did not have this tradition. A man taking off his hat/head covering is humbled and a woman putting on veil is humbled. To not cover our glory is definitely not to humble ourselves. Just look at all the women that need to fix their hair, either in a saloon or at home, before they go to church. They do the opposite of humbling themselves. This is not meant as a judgment, but rather a thought for the women out there. Who do we glorify, God, or ourselves?

so I had a brother in Christ explain this perfect so the power on her head i(a husband) is the man protecting her for the sake of the angels .. it’s not really about a head covering MY HAIR IS MY COVERING .. this is something I did learn from a brother 🙂 lol .. i am well learned but he is too so props to him

Most of Paul’s letters were only written to a specific church such as Rome, Ephesus or Corinth. Does this mean that the commandments contained within those letters do not apply to modern people? If we interpret the New Testament as containing some merely “cultural” commandments then what prevents us from interpreting more of the commandments in the New Testament as cultural? What prevents us from interpreting most of the commandments in the NT as cultural? What prevents us from interpreting all of the commandments in the NT as cultural? To claim a commandment is cultural is to engage in consequentialist ethical interpretation of it and thus to enact that method of ethical inquiry as a valid means of interpreting the NT. We may thus speculate about what the underlying values are to commandments in the Bible through the lens of what seems reasonable to us. If we do this then what prevents us from importing the underlying values of the larger world culture we came from into this? Even Augustine as a former Montanist did this in his ethics and he has been one of the biggest influences upon Christian theology since Paul. Yet eventually one could explain anything in any way that suits one, could one not? If we don’t want to do that then we could retreat into the Scriptures and use Scripture to interpret Scripture. In the Scripture we learn that love is the greatest commandment and that all other commandments exist underneath its banner. What prevents us thus from saying that all the other commandments are merely cultural interpretations of love, many of which are now out of date?

The Christian tradition of female head coverings which Paul was advocating was from Judaism; he was not teaching them to follow the lead of Greco-Roman culture. Even today, Orthodox Jewish women STILL cover their hair as a form of modesty. Yes, Greco-Roman culture did have views about head coverings being modesty; however, it was not ubiquitous through the empire. It was, however, ubiquitous throughout all the early churches.

What a yarn…Headcoveringdenotes displaying AUTHORITY.. The Holy Spirit will lead you into all truth, and is easily captured in understanding Authority under God and under the Authority of ones husband..Angels are also under Authority. It helps them to remember this when they observe our headcovering practice.. a veil of hair for women, and uncovered head for men..

Hi. I found this article fascinating, and it raises a couple of questions that I would love to be answered, if possible. Is there any historic or archaeological evidence that shows how Jewish men in Israel, at the time of Jesus, wore their hair? Whether they were fisherman, farmers or whatever. There are some believers who consider the idea that Jesus Christ had shoulder length hair, as many old paintings seem to depict the Lord: and there are other folks who because of the 1 Corinthians 11 chapter, say that Jesus would in no way have had long hair. The Shroud of Turin is most definitely fake, so we wont even bother with that subject. I would love to see more articles of yours, if there are any, on this subject of hair, especially as mentioned in Paul’s letters. But when I think about Samson and Nazarites, who had longish hair, it makes me think that God might not have hated long hair on some men. Please, if you can guide me to the right places so I can learn more about this topic, I would be so grateful. My name is Debbie by the way, and I am a dispensational bible believer with very short hair because of health issues. Thank you so much.

I’ve read papers that demonstrate that there were physiological/medical/beliefs and cultural understandings and practices in that context to the effect that a woman’s hair was part of her sexual/reproductive system. Paul’s language suggests that in that context a woman uncovering her hair in public was like exposing one’s genitals in public. Paul actually refers to a woman’s hair as the counterpart to a man’s “peribolaiou” or testicles (that was the Corinthian view in that context.) The temple prostitutes of the local temples would shave their heads because they did not want to be sexually fertile. This understanding is reinforced when Paul said, “…every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying disgraces her head, for she is one and the same as the woman whose head is shaved”, that is, both treatments of the hair are saying something in that context which is not compatible with the morality that Paul is exhorting the church to embrace.

1 Corinthians is wild, because we’re generally only familiar with verse chapter 13, which is only commonly read at weddings because LOVELOVELOVELOVELOVE. Your impression is that this epistle is a letter saying, “Great work, Corinth! You’re a shining example of what love is supposed to be! Keep it up!” But when you actually sit and read the whole thing, you realize that Paul is furious the entire time and chapter 13 is more like, “I can’t believe I have to explain this to grown-ass men and women, BUT HERE WE ARE” I have a strong suspicion from this letter that Paul might have been asexual because the mere mention of people having any sort of sex sems to send him into a conniption, but that’s another story.

I think Paul had stated his reasons that is a reminder that angels can be tempted a reminder of fallen angels that women are very attractive especially to have long beautiful hair – both for angels and men and quite distracting especially during worship service And more importantly it’s a tradition in Hebrew worship handed down and he knows no other worship tradition. I think we should heed and follow Paul’s advice.

Head coving was a SIGN of God’s governmental ORDER snd SUBMISSION to His Authority in His kingdom, the church. 1 Cor.11:6 say, “…if a woman is NOT covered, let her hair be cut OFF…..let her be covered”. Then in verse 10 it says,”Therefore she should have a SIGN of submission of to authority ON HER HEAD….” This indicates there should something in ADDITION to her hair that covers her head.

it tells you the answers in the chapter you have to read it, If a man is praying or prophesying not in the name of “God / Jesus” he is hiding the light of God and is glorifying himself and not GOD. A woman’s hair is her glory, If a woman uncovers her hair while praying or prophesying she is glorifying herself and not GOD. 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; and the head of Christ is God.” 4Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. 5But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.

Take a moment to consider that Paul was in jail, waiting to be killed, and took the time to read letters to him and write back to new Christians who were also living under threat of death. If you’re using God’s words under these conditions and head covering will save you from death, go ahead. Otherwise, take a note of Paul’s other words: be known for doing your good works not talking about yourself.

read some of Hippocrates (the guy doctors’ Hippocratic Oath is named after), he lived around that time, and his writing showed that at the time they believed hair was a reproductive organ (and that it was hollow, used to draw the semen up into the body for fertility… wild stuff given what we know today, but it was the medicine of the day) anyway, with that context, the answer to why is very simple… it was lewd… the equivalent today of going to church today in a tight miniskirt or with cleavage busting out of a low-V neck top

Well…I beg to differ. It was a thing of the early church, not just those in Corinth (1. Cor. 11:2,16) and it would be a beautiful sign of order of God (1. Cor. 11:3-15) in the churches today. Paul is NOT saying that about male coverings either. And about short hair of men. Again, NOTHING in the letter is saying that it was a Roman thing (see vs. 16). What is curious is that men are more likely prone to baldness then women. My wife is saying that she is preaching about God without words with her head covering in the church. Keeping this beautiful biblical commandment would be a powerful thing in opposition to modern society that holds to no tradition.

The passage teaches women to cover their hair in public. Paul then refers at the end of the passage that fighting about it isn’t our Christian custom. Pretty simple. Historical evidence backs all of that up. It us Western women that have a problem with it. Many other ancient religions that are still in operation like Judaism and Islam as well as very old Christian denominations continue to wear head coverings. It is only in Western evangelical Christianity and only fairly recently that head coverings gave been discontinued. Now it’s a big argument. Anyways, I wore head coverings for about 5 years and the biggest push back came from Christians. Evangelicals are taught it’s legalistic. My unsaved husband disliked it because it implied to others that he was spiritual when he was very not! When he wasn’t with me in public he was acting very unchristian. He didn’t want to be associated with any religious or spiritual behavior. Anyways, I quit because it was causing more division than harmony and we are called to be at peace. Head coverings will never be brought back to Western church culture because it is too strict. Fundamental Christianity for the most part is dying off because it is too strict in living standards and most people are not wanting to be that strict it’s too hard. Christianity is going down the apostate path and becoming wordly and lukewarm. That js what the Bible says will happen right before the apocalypse.

The Narrow Gate 13 “You can enter God’s Kingdom only through the narrow gate. The highway to hell(f) is broad, and its gate is wide for the many who choose that way. 14 But the gateway to life is very narrow and the road is difficult, and only a few ever find it. The Tree and Its Fruit 15 “Beware of false prophets who come disguised as harmless sheep but are really vicious wolves. 16 You can identify them by their fruit, that is, by the way they act. Can you pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 A good tree produces good fruit, and a bad tree produces bad fruit. 18 A good tree can’t produce bad fruit, and a bad tree can’t produce good fruit. 19 So every tree that does not produce good fruit is chopped down and thrown into the fire. 20 Yes, just as you can identify a tree by its fruit, so you can identify people by their actions. True Disciples 21 “Not everyone who calls out to me, ‘Lord! Lord!’ will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Only those who actually do the will of my Father in heaven will enter. 22 On judgment day many will say to me, ‘Lord! Lord! We prophesied in your name and cast out demons in your name and performed many miracles in your name.’ 23 But I will reply, ‘I never knew you. Get away from me, you who break God’s laws.’youtu.be/VxYP6LzvY7A?si=BwSCVwj9NQNXUUoI

It’s not up to anyones interpretation, it says what it says, very clearly about it being for the angels and he appeals to the old testament specifically Genesis and nothing about their culture and pretty much all churches for nearly 2000 years understood it to clearly mean exactly what it says. Women only quit wearing head coverings when women in society at large decided they wanted to be exactly like men THAT is the real reason it disappeared and the women in the church want to be treated just exactly like men also. Men still take their hat off when they pray because of this passage but the women no longer follow what they were asked in this passage.

Let’s be clear on this. It is from ancient times to us as humans. The watchers looked down and saw human women and they were fair.- Beautiful. Women begin covering their heads at that point. Women are supposed to cover their heads when they went into church because it is well known demons hang out at the entrance of churches. Again, to ward off watchers.

The passage is directly related to Genesis 1 to 3, not cultural. This article ignores what Paul specifically says with speculation. Consider it was in the 1960s when women uncovered, as feminism became strident. On the oter side is men covering which started early in the Church by clergy to show themselves superior to laity. In addition Scripture requires any church officer to be a husband. Instead you have as Paul prophecy said religions tgat forbid marriage (for clergy). There’s nothing cultural about the references to Genesis 1 to 3.

Men AND women covered their heads in the temple before the Divine Presence in the Holy of Holies. And in synagogue this custom was continued because the scrolls of scripture were brought in because scripture is that which is contained within the Ark of the Covenant, and thereby signifies the Divine Presence. The first Christians continued this Jewish practice because they were Jews, and the Holy Eucharist was even more the reality of the Divine Presence than the Holy of Holies in the temple. Some of the women of Corinth were acting like they were worshipping in the local temple of Diana, and defying common etiquette by removing their FABRIC head covering and speaking out of place like they were in a pagan temple. So in the beginning of Christianity men and women BOTH covered their heads because that was standard Jewish practice because virtually all Christians were Jewish, and men would REMOVE their head covering at THE CONSECRATION OF THE HOLY EUCHARIST because a man removed his head covering to show the common courtesy of acknowledging a superior.

My studies of ancient history have shown that in the early part of the Roman empire Roman men had long hair. When the long-haired barbarians began to appear on the outskirts of the Roman empire, the Roman sophisticated men did not want to look anything like these uncouth unsophisticated barbarians. So the Roman men begin to shorten their hair and even shorten and groom their beards. Then as time passed the uncouth long-haired barbarians were having an influence on the young Roman males. Those young men thought long hair was cool so to speak. Also I believe at that time the word nature as Paul used was actually the word custom. The custom of a true Roman male was to have short hair and not look like those uncouth unsophisticated heathen barbarians..

The Greek word for a woman’s hair is the same Greek word referred to as Testicle within Greek medical texts. (Parabolion) Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head exposed? Does not even nature (physis) itself teach (didaskō) you that if a man has long hair it is a disgrace to him, but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory (doxa)? For her hair is given to her for/ instead of/ in place of (anti) a peribolaion. The Hairs is given to Her instead of (THE HAIR OF MEN?) NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, it must be something only men have and not women.

Actually Paul says that it was a shame for a woman to cut her hair. If she were to cut it she might as well be shaved. A woman’s hair is her covering. It is her power over the angels. This is in reference to Gen 6 about the angels that sinned (Gen 6:2; Jude 6; 2 Peter 2:4). It is also just as shameful for men to have long hair as a woman. His hair is to be noticeably short. Not only is this gender distinction, but men are to appear before God uncovered.

The scriptures are written by men full of the Holy Spirit. None is to be disregarded. We are born of the Word. The Word is Truth. We are instructed to remember and observe the commands of the prophets and the teachings of Jesus through the apostles. Moses was given the exact pattern for Israel and it’s conduct and Paul was given the exact pattern for the church and it’s conduct. We ought to learn from Israel’s mistakes. “Because of the angels”…. Ephesians 3:10 says that God’s purpose is to use the church to display His infinite wisdom to the rulers in the unseen realm. We ought not think of ourselves being too wise for simple instruction. The head covering is a physical representation of something spiritual, like communion and water baptism. Also the head covering, hides the woman’s glory. We say “to Him be all the glory”…. But do we really mean that?

A women’s hair is her covering. If a woman cuts her hair, which is her covering, she dishonors her husband, who is her head, and also Christ who is the Head of all. Christian women who really understand this revelation, do not wear scarves and wraps to cover their hair, they keep their hair long and uncut to honour their husbands and glorify God.

what an ignorance : the covered head by the Toga (if male) or Palla if female of the Roman Statues refers to the ‘Capite Velati’ ( covered head ) mandatory in any RITUAL action of the Roman Religion. It was necessary to focus, to don’t be distracted by signs or things in peripheral vision, and as a sign of modesty regarding THE GODS. It was used ALWAYS during prayers or offerings. So this has NOTHING to do, nothing with Christianism. In the Greek religion, instead, there were no covering of the head during the rituals.

Remember that Paul was Saul – a Roman legionnaire for a significant portion of his life. Soldiers spent a long time away from home & away from women in general. Sometimes many years at a stretch. The only women they frequently would have come into contact with were prostitutes and slaves, fallen women and those of a lower class. Paul is consistently quite biased against women & so begins in the earliest days that frequently repeated thread of opinion where women are temptresses & ‘lower’ than men. As Paul contributed most to the New Testament, his biased worldview became the basis of Christianity. Especially later (330CE-odd) when Christianity became a Roman approved & adopted religion – by a community dominated by men & the war machine. Such gender inequalities were not so marked at the time in some places, such as Greece, Egypt and even as far flung as Britain & the Scandinavias at that period of time immediately following Jesus Christ. Jesus Himself was not depicted by early writers of the New Testament as displaying the kind of demeaning language towards women Paul did. So Paul’s assertion that women need to demarcate themselves differently from men was Paul’s personal stamp of gender inequality onto Christianity – a Roman soldier’s viewpoint & not that of Jesus Christ or even (as Paul claims) ‘a natural order’.

Paul can’t make new commandments. He can only quote commandments from the Law of God. There is no commandment about head coverings while praying. Paul gives his opinion a lot and sometimes he’s wrong. Paul told the people to remain unmarried. God said it’s good for a man to have a wife. Paul said it’s fine to eat meats that were sacrificed to idols because those idols don’t exist. God told us not to eat meats that were sacrificed to idols. We have to put Pauls writings in perspective. Paul came along 20 years after the crucifixion. What we have are letters Paul wrote to various people and groups. There is some wisdom in those letters but they are not the Words of God. They are letters that an early Christian man wrote.

What if Paul was a false prophet? Peter was a student of Yeshua. NOT PAUL. So, who do you think was actually right in the dispute between Peter and Paul recorded in Galatians? Peter would have known Yeshua and his teachings much better than Paul. So why do we never see Peter’s response to Paul? There are also numerous times that Paul goes against the teachings of the Messiah. In that case, I say we defenestrate Paul and his writings. Stop wasting your time with Paul’s nonsense.