If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head. A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. For this reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head. – 1 Corinthians 11:6–10
The argument Paul makes here is not a cultural one. His argument is twofold: headship/order, and that ambiguous phrase, "Because of the angels." My discussion today is going to center around that phrase. Lots of other authors (better ones than I) have discussed the whole veiling thing and I don't yearn to be redundant.
Who did Satan go after in the garden of Eden? Eve, of course. But why? Maybe because, as much as the lurking feminist in us hates to admit it, ladies, we ARE the 'weaker vessel'. God made us nurturers, not fighters. Satan knew that and used it to pervert the entire planet.
Now, my theory about the verse in question is this: the angels Paul is referring to may not be the good ones that we're used to thinking of. Maybe, just maybe, the wearing of a veil is a signal to the enemy- "Hands off, this one is marked." I know that in my own experience, I've heard the whispered comment a couple of times, "Don't mess with her, she's religious." Once it was from a group of three thug-looking guys who were cruising the grocery store parking lot.
People here on the wrong side of town give me an extra measure of respect since I started veiling. It was interesting, I think, that I began veiling
after we moved here. I was able to see the difference in peoples' responses to me, especially the men. So not only have I heard those whispered comments, but the men don't treat me like I might possibly be up for a one-night-stand. That used to drive me crazy. I mean- here I was, towing around three kids (then), wearing a wedding ring, and the guys would still be overly friendly. Not any more. Maybe it's that I look weird enough... or maybe the sign of authority on my head does more to warn them off, in the spiritual world, than I know.
So my conclusion is this: I know that everything the Lord asks us to do is for our benefit, not just for arbitrary rule-making. My hypothesis is that the veil is for our protection, not our repression. That in mind, I wear it thankfully, like a soldier wears his armor. Being the weaker vessel, I need all the help I can get.
What is your opinion of veiling?
Comments (277)
great post!!!!
Its for women who find it culturally and religiously relevant to them, but not for all women. And I'm liking the reasons for covering up in Islam much better. It sounds a lot less like there's some man bent on oppressing women writing the Bible.
good post
Who did Satan go after in the garden of Eden? Eve, of course. But why? Maybe because, as much as the lurking feminist in us hates to admit it, ladies, we ARE the 'weaker vessel'.
I believe this line of thinking to be in error. When God created the universe he created from lesser to greater. Woman was created last.
Satan went after woman not because of her weakness but because of her strength.
During the entire seduction scene between Eve and Satan, Adam just stood there, dick in hand. Adam was a weak, snivelling coward.
It takes a woman's love to make a man. Without woman, man is a rowdy, warring, uncivilized, uncommitted boy.
I'd never heard that view before. It makes sense. Thanks for sharing!
@LoBornlite@xanga - It says in the bible that woman is supposed to be in submission to her husband.
The husband is supposed to be the head not the woman.
@Kristenmomof3@xanga - What is the man's responsibility pray tell?
I'd rather shave my head...
That is an angle I have neither heard before or even considered, but thanks for bringing it out. I have been veiling for 12 years now because it is in Scripture, and I do not believe it was a cultural point that Paul was making. If so, then we would have to consider, in context, the rest of the chapter or even the whole book as being relevant to only that church at that time. That would mean what he said about communion as well. And isn't it interesting that women covered their heads until the last century? That is a very long line of example to suddenly say that it is something we don't need to do anymore. How can we have so much arrogance to say that 1900 years of women had it wrong, and we are the only ones with the right interpretation or understanding of this Scripture? Either the Bible is the Word of God and profitable for us in ALL things, or it isn't. For me, "His commands are not burdensome", and I desire above all things to obey the One who gave His life for me. 1 John 2:3-5 says: "Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. He who says, “I know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But whoever keeps His word, truly the love of God is perfected in him. By this we know that we are in Him." For that reason, let us obey our Lord and His Word, whether we feel like it or not.
This is just about the most sexist, ridiculous thing I've read on revelife so far.
Come on! You can do better than that. How about a good ol' "whore-stoning"? We weakling females are obviously not worth anything (in your view), and if we're so weak that we're always a target for Satan, it's probably best to get rid of us. Right?
@LoBornlite@xanga - Man's responsibility is to work the ground.
Genesis 3:16-19 To the woman he said, "I will greatly increase your pain in childbirth. You will bring forth children in pain. Your desire will be toward your husband, but he will rule over you." (17) To Adam he said, "Because you listened to what your wife said and ate from the tree about which I gave you the order, 'You are not to eat from it,' the ground is cursed on your account; you will work hard to eat from it as long as you live. (18) It will produce thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat field plants. (19) You will eat bread by the sweat of your forehead till you return to the ground - for you were taken out of it: you are dust, and you will return to dust."
Ugh.
No head covering is not necessary, it is a spiritual covering to which it speaks.
@Kristenmomof3@xanga - LoBornlite is right to an extent... Adam stood by and did nothing... his world was about to crash and burn and he stood by and allowed his wife to be decieved...
BUT... at the same time... it's is a man's job to work the ground as you said... it's all about obedience to what Scripture denotes for us...
as far as the veiling of the head for a woman... Paul goes further to say that it is the long hair of a woman that is her glory and covering... in the same book... remember the context in which Paul was writing... the church of Corinth was a church in the middle of a debaucherous city... Temple of Aphrodite, commerce crazy, metropolis... and women running around going nuts being promiscuous with no restraint...
@LoBornlite@xanga - and no it does NOT take a woman to make a man a man... it takes the power of the regenerative work of the Holy Spirit to make a man a man... a woman only accentuates that concept... she isn't the breaking point... the woman is indeed a powerful factor that helps him along... but she isn't the solution and God forbid she's the path in which gives a man his manliness... i would seriously rethink and retool your ideal about that...
@LadyLibellule@xanga - don't go overboard with that thought... u know that's not the case... and it certainly doesn't help out your perspective... whoever this post is featured by didn't read ahead... to get rid of woman is to remake the entire social structure of family and church and society... without women, it would be darn near impossible to have good kids running around with brains and heart because women are able to emotionally connect better than men... remaking the entire social structure... wait... they're doing that now already with the feminist and egalitarian perspectives...
@Kristenmomof3@xanga - Man's responsibility is to work the ground.
How many men do you know who still work the ground? I know precious few men who still work the ground.
HELLO? Only third world nations still depend on agriculture where men work the ground.
If woman must be submissive to man, what is man's responsibility toward woman? I mean besides working her like a piece of dirt.
To each their own, I suppose, though it's a rather outdated practice. I was under the impression that Muslim women were the only ones that still practiced that.
@leadworshipper82 - If you read and study the Greek it is very clear he is talking about a veil covering a woman's glory (her hair)
@leadworshipper82 - You have a lot to learn. All your theory will be cut to ribbons once you get married or try to have a meaningful relationship with a real woman.
@Made2sing4Jesus@xanga - If the headcovering Paul is referring to is meant to only be spiritual, then why does he refer again and again to the physical hair? In verse 6 he says: "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." If this covering is only spiritual, how would it be known whether she was covered or not?
@LoBornlite@xanga - actually a husband is not supposed treat his wife like dirt. A husband is to love his wife like Yeshua loves the church
Ephesians 5:22-33 Wives should submit to their husbands as they do to the Lord; (23) because the husband is head of the wife, just as the Messiah, as head of the Messianic Community, is himself the one who keeps the body safe. (24) Just as the Messianic Community submits to the Messiah, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything. (25) As for husbands, love your wives, just as the Messiah loved the Messianic Community, indeed, gave himself up on its behalf, (26) in order to set it apart for God, making it clean through immersion in the mikveh, so to speak, (27) in order to present the Messianic Community to himself as a bride to be proud of, without a spot, wrinkle or any such thing, but holy and without defect. (28) This is how husbands ought to love their wives - like their own bodies; for the man who loves his wife is loving himself. (29) Why, no one ever hated his own flesh! On the contrary, he feeds it well and takes care of it, just as the Messiah does the Messianic Community, (30) because we are parts of his Body. (31) "Therefore a man will leave his father and mother and remain with his wife, and the two will become one."f (32) There is profound truth hidden here, which I say concerns the Messiah and the Messianic Community. (33) However, the text also applies to each of you individually: let each man love his wife as he does himself, and see that the wife respects her husband.
or in KJV:
Ephesians 5:22-33 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. (23) 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; (26) That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, (27) That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. (28) So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. (29) For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church: (30) For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. (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. (32) This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church. (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.
Women are the "weaker vessel"?!
Try arguing without making a sexist claim.
@eclipse_the_dawn@xanga - There are many many christian women who still veil.
@storiesandsinker@xanga - easy... men are like tupperward... women are like fine china... you treat them differently...
you throw tupperware around and heat it up and abuse it and it'll take a certain amount of abuse...
you only bring out the fine china on special occaisions... you save it, clean it, cherish it, and handle it a certain way... with value, care, gentleness, and love...
Throughout scripture, God is moving humanity from their current culture towards an ideal ethic. For example, the Old Testament had laws about taking women as spoils of war, limitations saying that masters could beat their slaves but not kill them, etc. This has brought about a lot of criticism from people outside Christianity who wonder how God could condone those behaviors. Yet they were a significant upgrade from behavior at the time. It wasn't ideal, but God was slowing bringing people towards an ideal ethic.Jesus further improves upon these ethics on his teachings on divorce, for example. In Paul's letter to Philemon, he encourages Philemon to treat his slave Onesimus as a brother. I think the ethics of scripture are moving towards a perfect ethic, rather than always representing a perfect ethic.
I think that is what Paul is doing in I Corinthians 11. He's discussing the current ethic, and then leaving room for improvement upon it. He talks about modesty in worship, which is what the first part of the chapter is about. But then he continues in verse 11, saying "However, in the Lord, neither is woman independent of man, nor is man independent of women."
I'd also argue that Paul's command is cultural based on his statement in verse 14, "Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him...." We can't forget about the Nazirite vow in Numbers 6, which Samson took. While it may appear that Paul is making a universal argument by appealing to "nature," he obviously isn't because God had some men grow long hair.
There are a number of passages in which biblical authors use a theological analogy. Many people have read these and understood them to be transcultural (i.e. applying to all cultures in all times.) However, there are a number of examples where we do not accept this theological analogy as transcultural. Ephesians 6 says that slaves should act as if they are slaves of Christ. Many times this has been used to argue in favor of slavery. Another example of that of a Monarchy analogy, in which God is pictured as the ruling King. In other places, Christ is described as the firstborn, which has significant cultural implications that do not exist in our culture. In scripture, even being right-handed was considered strong, while being left-handed was weak Therefore, God is described as doing things with his right hand. We cannot assume that certain instructions are transcultural simply because they are supported by theological analogy.
It's for these reasons that I think that the instructions in I Corinthians 11 should be taken in a specific cultural context, rather than as a transcultural command.
@Kristenmomof3@xanga - actually a husband is not supposed treat his wife like dirt. A husband is to love his wife like Yeshua loves the church
Thank you! And that's a whole lot of love!!