Hi Krispy,
This topic was noted to be for those who believe in head coverings. Couldn't resist huh :)?
I find it interesting that Paul says that women is the glory of man v.7 and man is the glory of God and thats why man does not need to be covered.....and then Paul states how the hair is a glory to her (man's glory). The glory that needs to be covered!
So Paul is saying women need to be covered because she is the glory of man. How can you cover up man's glory with long hair when it is stated to be a glory to her?
Paul is saying long hair is given to females and not males as a natural covering
Does that part make sense to you?
Here is a post that is from my husband under another topic. I believe it to make a lot of sense and will show that there is more to a covering than just long hair.
Quote:
It seems the scriptures say that women should wear head coverings in the church - especially when prophesying or praying.
I think the confusions comes because the first part of the passage seems to say one thing and the last part of the passage seems to say just the opposite.
4Every man who has something on his head while praying or prophesying disgraces his head.
5But 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.
6For if a woman does not cover her head, let her also have her hair cut off; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, let her cover her head.
7For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man.
8For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man;
9for indeed man was not created for the woman's sake, but woman for the man's sake.
10Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.
11However, in the Lord, neither is woman independent of man, nor is man independent of woman.
12For as the woman originates from the man, so also the man has his birth through the woman; and all things originate from God.
These verses say that the covering is NOT her hair. Notice verse 4 and 5:
Quote:
5But 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. 6For if a woman does not cover her head, let her also have her hair cut off; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, let her cover her head.
Paul says that if a women prays without a covering let her shave her head. So obviously she has hair already. Therefore the covering is external.
Here's where I think it is confusing for some. Here it can seem like Paul is saying a womans hair is her covering but that's not what it is saying.
Quote:
13Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered?
14Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him,
15but if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her? For her hair is given to her for a covering.
Paul is making a comparison to show what should be obvious to his hearers. It seems as if Paul is saying "this should be obvious to you just like men having short hair and women having long hair should be obvious as what is right". Paul is using something his hearers would agree was obvious to say the same thing about women covering their heads.
Paul then concludes this passage by saying :
"16But if one is inclined to be contentious, we have no other practice, nor have the churches of God." NASB
Paul is saying..."you can disagree but this is the practice of the Churches of God".
I think this passage as a whole is even more confusing in the KJV. In the kjv verse 16 says: 16But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.
That really doesn't make much sense. It would seem odd that Paul would lay out a whole teaching on why women should have their hair covered then say "oh, by the way..we don't do that".
That would be like laying out a whole teaching on Jesus being the only way to heaven and then at the end say "by the way..you can actually get to heaven by many way". It wouldn't make sense.