Is it ok for a man to pray while wearing a head covering? Paul told the Corinthians it was NOT ok.

[amadeus]

Let's turn that question around. When my Jewish friend asked me to serve in his wedding, he asked me up front if I would have a problem with wearing a yarmulke during the service. There would certainly be prayers said to the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, asking for His blessing on this marriage. Should I wear the covering to avoid causing offense?

(The answer is that it took me about 750 milliseconds to agree to wear the kippah. It was an honor to stand with my friend, though it turned out I was not required to wear a yarmulke after all. And the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob has indeed blessed their marriage; thirty-three years and a daughter and two sons later, they're still happily married.)

I would have agreed to wear it as well. Congratulations on length of marriage the blessings of offspring.

 

[CadyandZoe]

(1 Corinthians 11:4-7) 4 Every man that prays or prophesies having something on his head shames his head; 5 but every woman that prays or prophesies with her head uncovered shames her head, for it is one and the same as if she were a [woman] with a shaved head. 6 For if a woman does not cover herself, let her also be shorn; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered. 7 For a man ought not to have his head covered, as he is God’s image and glory; but the woman is man’s glory.

All,
In order to understand the passage here, it is important to know that verse 4 is NOT Paul's command or opinion. Rather, he is repeating the understood cultural assumption. The current culture at the time taught that "Every man that prays or prophesies having something on his head shames his head . . ." This is not Paul's opinion. This is simply what everyone understood at the time. Who knows what he might say if he was living today. I doubt the Lord or anyone else would care about wearing hats today.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Did I say it doesn't have a literal meaning? I choose to prioritize spiritual meaning to Scriptures, especially when I know it isn't impacting me. For if it was a concern I would be convicted about it.

And how do you know the non literal or allegorical or spiritual meaning you are applying is from God or not? this is the old kabbalistic concept that the bible has a literal and other meaning. And if it has a literal meaning- why the need to go further??????

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Wake up Ronald!

What? YOU accused those of commanding what Paul commanded in a negative way, so I was wondering if you referred to Paul in the same light seeing how he commanded a dress code for the church assembly

 

[Always Believing]

1 Corinthians 11:4
English Standard Version
4 Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head,

Paul is speaking of long hair like a woman's. He uses vails only as a setting for making difference between the length of hair of men and woman, that God wants to see as Christians. It's a shame for men to have long hair like a woman, and for women to get men's haircuts. Whether the hair is long enough to cover the head or not is the dividing line.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Follow the clues.

I choose to follow Scripture. Not cultural clues.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Paul is speaking of long hair like a woman's. He uses vails only as a setting for making difference between the length of hair of men and woman, that God wants to see as Christians. It's a shame for men to have long hair like a woman, and for women to get men's haircuts. Whether the hair is long enough to cover the head or not is the dividing line.

Then i f hair is what Paul is referring to (which he is not) then men must have their heads shaved! Paul said it is a shame for a man to have their head covered.

 

[quietthinker]

What? YOU accused those of commanding what Paul commanded in a negative way, so I was wondering if you referred to Paul in the same light seeing how he commanded a dress code for the church assembly

just wake up!

 

[Robert Gwin]

All,
In order to understand the passage here, it is important to know that verse 4 is NOT Paul's command or opinion. Rather, he is repeating the understood cultural assumption. The current culture at the time taught that "Every man that prays or prophesies having something on his head shames his head . . ." This is not Paul's opinion. This is simply what everyone understood at the time. Who knows what he might say if he was living today. I doubt the Lord or anyone else would care about wearing hats today.

2ti 3:16 Every scripture inspired of God [is] also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness.

Mal 3:6 For I, Jehovah, change not

 

[Always Believing]

Then i f hair is what Paul is referring to (which he is not)

Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?

But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.

then men must have their heads shaved! Paul said it is a shame for a man to have their head covered.

This is not what I said. Try reading again, and when you correctly understand what I said, if you still object then you can show me why my reading from the verses is not correct. If you can't understand what I said, I can clarify anything you ask for.

 

[Bob Estey]

1 Corinthians 11:4
English Standard Version
4 Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head,

This is interesting. With my low blood sugar, I get cold easy, and when I get cold, I get sick. If I'm outside on a winter day, I have to wear a stocking cap whether I'm praying or not.

 

[CadyandZoe]

I choose to follow Scripture. Not cultural clues.

My point is this. Your objection to my post is based on a faulty interpretation of the passage which fails to follow Paul's argument. Paul is NOT commanding anyone to wear a hat.

 

[CadyandZoe]

2ti 3:16 Every scripture inspired of God [is] also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness.

Mal 3:6 For I, Jehovah, change not

Every scripture properly understood is profitable. First understand the passage. Then make application. In my opinion, you don't understand the passage. Paul is NOT commanding anyone to wear a hat.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?

But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.




This is not what I said. Try reading again, and when you correctly understand what I said, if you still object then you can show me why my reading from the verses is not correct. If you can't understand what I said, I can clarify anything you ask for.

No but that is the conclusion one has to draw from what Paul wrote if hair is the covering Paul is referring to a woman must have on her head when in the assembly of believers.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

This is not what I said. Try reading again, and when you correctly understand what I said, if you still object then you can show me why my reading from the verses is not correct. If you can't understand what I said, I can clarify anything you ask for.

So here is what you said:

"Paul is speaking of long hair like a woman's. He uses vails only as a setting for making difference between the length of hair of men and woman, that God wants to see as Christians. It's a shame for men to have long hair like a woman, and for women to get men's haircuts. Whether the hair is long enough to cover the head or not is the dividing line."​

​

YOu are simply drawing conclusions that are not to be found in the text at all.​

​

Paul is speaking of a woman covering her head to honor her husband! and uses nature and womans natural long hair as an example.​

Also the focus or context is not at all about a length of covering but whether or not one should have a covering in prayer! We simply cannot add to Scriptural context because we find the subject unpleasant.

​

​

 

[Ronald Nolette]

My point is this. Your objection to my post is based on a faulty interpretation of the passage which fails to follow Paul's argument. Paul is NOT commanding anyone to wear a hat.

I did not say a hat. Paul said a covering!

Paul declared if a woman prays with her head uncovered (akatakalyptos) not veiled! It is a shame for her.

And Paul also declared that a woman was given long hair for a covering, (peribolaion) 2 different words with 2 different meanings in greek

kakakalyptos means a man made covering.

 

[bbyrd009]

1 Corinthians 11:4
English Standard Version
4 Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head,

i suggest that one might think "hat" there whereas Paul likely meant something else

 

[CadyandZoe]

I did not say a hat. Paul said a covering!

Paul declared if a woman prays with her head uncovered (akatakalyptos) not veiled! It is a shame for her.

And Paul also declared that a woman was given long hair for a covering, (peribolaion) 2 different words with 2 different meanings in greek

kakakalyptos means a man made covering.

Yes, Paul was repeating the cultural taboo. He is not giving his own opinion on the matter. Paul doesn't say one way or the other whether he agrees with the taboo or not. There is nothing moral or spiritual about wearing a covering or a hat or whatever.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

My point is this. Your objection to my post is based on a faulty interpretation of the passage which fails to follow Paul's argument. Paul is NOT commanding anyone to wear a hat.

No but in the day most woman had a covering on their head like something that could be considered a hood like extension of their robe. And given the faqct Paul uses aner and gune in the passage for man and woman it is referring to married woman in context. I understand the passage well.

I do not understand teh opinions of many hear of what they think Paul is trying to say. I would like to see your biblical defense of your position.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Yes, Paul was repeating the cultural taboo. He is not giving his own opinion on the matter. Paul doesn't say one way or the other whether he agrees with the taboo or not. There is nothing moral or spiritual about wearing a covering or a hat or whatever.

YOu did not read the passage wellthen. Paul concludes this discourse about head coverings this way:

1 Corinthians 11:16

King James Version

​

16 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.

Paul is not merely rehashing culture- He is saying this is his teaching and it is the teaching in all the churches! If you accept Paul at his word. If not why not?