1 Corinthians 11:8-16
8 For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man;
9 for indeed man was not created for the woman’s sake, but woman for the man’s sake.
10 Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.
11 However, in the Lord, neither is woman independent of man, nor is man independent of woman.
12 For as the woman originates from the man, so also the man has his birth through the woman; and all things originate from God.
13 Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered?
14 Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him,
15 but if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her? For her hair is given to her for a covering.
16 But if one is inclined to be contentious, we have no other practice, nor have the churches of God.
Introduction:
This is a continuation of the discussion above. This section of the letter is an explanation of the statement started in verse 3. Paul has instructed them, “Do not dishonor God. Do not dishonor your husband.” Now I understand that we are to honor God in all things, especially our behavior in church, our prayers in church. (I don’t think these ‘rules’ Paul puts forth apply to personal, private prayer. When we are alone talking with Jesus, no one will see to be able to judge or condemn for violating community standards.) (See Notes 1 through 4 below.)
V. 8 - “For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man” - Look back to the statement in verse 3, above: “But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.” Chuck Smith stated in his commentary, “Christ is the authority over the husband. And God is the authority over Christ. Bible has never taught that God favors the man over the woman. The Bible does teach that God made man first, and then from man formed the woman.” (Note 2)
V. 9 - “for indeed man was not created for the woman’s sake, but woman for the man’s sake.” - Paul’s basis for saying this is found in Genesis “The LORD God said, ‘It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a companion for him who corresponds to him.’ The LORD God formed out of the ground every living animal of the field and every bird of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them, and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. So the man named all the animals, the birds of the air, and the living creatures of the field, but for Adam no companion who corresponded to him was found. So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep, and while he was asleep, he took part of the man's side and closed up the place with flesh. Then the LORD God made a woman from the part he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. Then the man said, "This one at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; this one will be called 'woman,' for she was taken out of man." That is why a man leaves his father and mother and unites with his wife, and they become a new family. The man and his wife were both naked, but they were not ashamed.” (Gen 2:18-25)
God brought every creature to Adam, who gave each animal a name to identify it. God knew Adam was alone, and not ‘complete’. After this exercise, Adam still was in need of companionship. So God created Eve from Adam’s rib. So, woman (Eve) came from man (Adam). Man and woman have a relationship that is much closer than man with animal. Man has identified every type of animal, fish, bird, or insect. But man (husband) does not have a personal, intimate relationship with these as he does with his wife (woman).
Chuck Smith stated, “Bible has never taught that God favors the man over the woman. The Bible does teach that God made man first, and then from man formed the woman. God saw that man by himself could never make it, and thus, the woman created, as God said, ‘for the man.’ “ (Note 2) It might not be stated in scripture, but man is also created for woman - the symbiotic relationship between man and woman is deeper and more meaningful than any other except our relationship with the Lord. The differences in our mental, emotional, and physical make-up are such that the two melded together makes each of us more complete than we can be individually. We bring balance to each other that is attained in no other way.
V. 10 - “Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.” - The covering of the woman’s head when in public, in church services, when praying in church shows she accepts that her husband has the authority assigned by God (not by men’s laws, but by God’s). What about single, unmarried, women? Do they pray with veils when in church? Perhaps that is implied - the woman accepts the authority of Jesus Christ over herself. Again, I note that we do not have such customs in the United States (we did many years ago - most women wore hats in church).
V. 11 - “However, in the Lord, neither is woman independent of man, nor is man independent of woman.” - God has created man and woman to be His children through Christ Jesus our Lord. There is no distinction - neither is superior to the other. We all come to God by grace and the sacrifice of His Son on the cross. Christ’s resurrection confirmed that death for us was defeated. We can live in eternity with Him, without fear, with great joy. “In worship men should follow dress and hair codes which proclaim them to be male, etc. (woman show to be woman). Make sure our worship is ordered appropriately to honor God’s creation and anticipate its fulfillment in the new creation - this is still a priority in our services.” (Note 4)
V. 12 - “For as the woman originates from the man, so also the man has his birth through the woman; and all things originate from God” - Paul wrote God considers men and women equally, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female - for all of you are one in Christ Jesus.” (Gal. 3:28) From one of the commentaries, “Men and women are not independent, but a partnership. They cannot live without each other. Much respect for mothers (we all have one!) Therefore, love and respect must be shown (especially in the home). If we cannot respect women (mothers) we are not following God’s will. “ (Note 1)
V. 13 - “is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered?” - Community standards indicated that married women were to show their respect for their husbands by having a head covering. In some, if not most instances, an adult woman without a head covering was a sign to the community she was not married. A married woman was to be respected by all in the community - she was ‘not available’. N.T. Wright said, “In that day, only prostitutes did not cover their heads when in public. So, if people see the women with their hair down and uncovered, they might jump to the conclusions about what was going on in the ‘church’ “. (Note 4)
V. 14 - “Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him” - There are few doctrinal mandates in Christianity. Hair length is not one of the doctrinal statements from the Lord. However, faith and belief in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, confession that you believe in Him; remembering His sacrifice by taking communion; publicly acknowledging your faith in Christ by word and deed - that is: confession and baptism are ‘must haves’. Long hair on a man is not a violation of God’s commands, but it does reflect on us as believers.
As David Guzik said, “Long hair (for a man) is a shame, not a sin. It is distracting. Similarly - a woman’s short hair is also a shame and distracting. (It is so distracting they might as well shave their heads!)” (Note 1)
Also, N.T. Wright wrote, “So Paul, then, speaking of the woman is saying it is dishonoring in a sense to her husband, her head, if she would go unveiled. Paul said that it was dishonoring to your husbands, because living there in Corinth they were living in the center of pagan licentiousness. not wanting to wear their veils, not being understood by the world, were opening themselves to be misidentified as a prostitute, and thus, dishonoring their husbands.” (Note 4)
V. 15 - “but if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her? For her hair is given to her for a covering.” - I am not sure this is a rhetorical question answered by “Yes. Long hair on a woman is to her glory.” Perhaps it is more of a statement that women have long hair styles, and in essence is part of the visible differentiation between men (short hair) and women. If Paul was insisting that women’s long hair was vital, then the question would have been a statement (“Women’s long hair is for His glory, and is a covering.) N. T. Wright says that “Paul does not congratulate the women on their expressions of freedom (hair and clothing changes - he is advocating maintaining gender differentiation during worship.” (Note 4) This is echoed by Guzik, “Women’s long hair is “nature’s veil”, therefore a covering.” (Note 1)
V. 16 - “But if one is inclined to be contentious, we have no other practice, nor have the churches of God.” - Chuck Smith put it this way: “Thus, it was not intended to be a universal rule for the church as some of the churches sought to make it a universal rule. For years the women have had to wear hats and all when they went to church. But Paul said that we don't have any such custom in all the churches. If you want to argue about it and all, there is no such custom in all the churches. It was something that did relate more to the church in Corinth.” (Note 2)
Men and women do not need to be picking on each other about this. See: “Men and women are for mutual comfort and blessing, not as slave and tyrant. God said we are ‘one flesh’, therefore each should know their place. Man should not abuse his ‘position’ or ‘power’. There should be no breaches in natural decency.” (Note 3)
Also - “Custom is in a great measure the rule of decency. And the common practice of the churches is what would have them govern themselves by. He does not silence the contentious by mere authority, but lets them know that they would appear to the world as very odd and singular in their humour if they would quarrel for a custom to which all the churches of Christ were at that time utter strangers, or against a custom in which they all concurred, and that upon the ground of natural decency. It was the common usage of the churches for women to appear in public assemblies, and join in public worship, veiled; and it was manifestly decent that they should do so. Those must be very contentious indeed who would quarrel with this, or lay it aside.” (Note 3) Finally, from Wright’s commentary I’ll add: “In worship men should follow dress and hair codes which proclaim them to be male, etc. (woman show to be woman). Make sure our worship is ordered appropriately to honor God’s creation and anticipate its fulfillment in the new creation - this is still a priority in our services. Paul does not congratulate the women on their expressions of freedom (hair and clothing changes) - he is advocating maintaining gender differentiation during worship.” (Note 4)
***A little side note here on my observations: Part of how we view this is because almost every movie, TV show, or painting of 'Biblical' times has the men with long(ish) hair. Since there are no photographs of the people of those eras, we assume that men had long hair because there probably no barber shops. Note there are a couple a couple of instances in scripture, particularly in the OT, where men do not cut their hair on purpose because they are fulfilling a vow (Num 6:5; Acts 18:18) - couple of these are 'positive': if the men took a 'Nazarite' oath they did not cut hair or beard until the oath was fulfilled; the judge Samson (Jdg 13:24, 19:19-21) did not have his hair cut as commanded by the Lord. (There may be other examples) On the other hand, David's son, Absalom had long hair which led to his demise. (2 Sam 18:9ff) There are instances of 'crazy' men who did not have their hair cut. Also, men would shave their heads when in deep mourning. (Jer 7:29) This is not to claim evidence, but an observation that maybe a man with long hair was little unusual. I’m not saying they wore ‘buzz cuts’, but long hair down to their shoulders may not have been standard, Also, it seems implied that women's hair styling included long hair.
(This passage is difficult, and I did not feel competent to comment with assurance. I have consulted several commentaries, three of which were included in my “Blue Letter Bible” application on my iPad, and one other. See Notes 1 through 4 below.)
Note 1: David Guzik; “1 Corinthians Commentary”; from “Blue Letter Bible” application on iPad.
Note 2: Chuck Smith; “1 Corinthians Commentary”; from “Blue Letter Bible” application on iPad.
Note 3: Matthew Henry; “1 Corinthians Commentary”; from “Blue Letter Bible” application on iPad.
Note 4: N.T. Wright; “Paul for Everyone: 1 Corinthians”; Westminster John Knox Press; 2004
No comments:
Post a Comment