1 Corinthians 11:15

[jfrog]

11:15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.

Forget about whether the broader context of 1 Corinthians 11 is about veils or long hair or uncut hair or whatever else. This verse by itself can be used to establish that long hair on a woman is a good thing and if the bible calls it a good thing then who can be against it?

I think many apostolics have forgotten the biblical principles that established certain practices for them. As such the veil arguments and uncut hair arguments and everything else are just distractions from the most sure biblical principle that Long Hair on a woman is a good thing. The finer details in 1 corinthians 11 can probably be argued all day long but this one point will always remain.

[Truthseeker]

Isn't it interesting no where in all the commandments in the law is there anything mentioned regarding women's hair needing to be uncut or even long?

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Truthseeker

Isn't it interesting no where in all the commandments in the law is there anything mentioned regarding women's hair needing to be uncut or even long?

Does that have any effect on the truth Paul wrote that a woman's long hair is her glory and that it is given to her for a covering?

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by jfrog

Does that have any effect on the truth Paul wrote that a woman's long hair is her glory and that it is given to her for a covering?

No, but it seems to be a cultural issue, since Paul wrote as though they already knew it and he rebuked them for not abiding by it. If they did not get it from scripture to warrant a rebuke for not keeping it in 1 Cor 11, then where else did they get it from?

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by mfblume

No, but it seems to be a cultural issue, since Paul wrote as though they already knew it and he rebuked them for not abiding by it. If they did not get it from scripture to warrant a rebuke for not keeping it in 1 Cor 11, then where else did they get it from?

Paul wrote it was from nature

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by jfrog

11:15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.

Forget about whether the broader context of 1 Corinthians 11 is about veils or long hair or uncut hair or whatever else. This verse by itself can be used to establish that long hair on a woman is a good thing and if the bible calls it a good thing then who can be against it?

I think many apostolics have forgotten the biblical principles that established certain practices for them. As such the veil arguments and uncut hair arguments and everything else are just distractions from the most sure biblical principle that Long Hair on a woman is a good thing. The finer details in 1 corinthians 11 can probably be argued all day long but this one point will always remain.

I think this is one of the most misunderstood verses by many Pentecostals.

They view "glory" here as some sort of God given power.

This is really more about how women feel...her hair, to her, is her pride and joy...her hear is a source of pride

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

I think this is one of the most misunderstood verses by many Pentecostals.

They view "glory" here as some sort of God given power.

This is really more about how women feel...her hair, to her, is her pride and joy...her hear is a source of pride

Paul says nature teaches that if a woman has long hair it is a glory to her. The 'glory' is contrasted with the 'shame' which Paul says is attached to a man having long hair. What is a 'shame' for a man is a 'glory' to a woman.

Everybody knows that when a woman has long, flowing hair people ooh and ahh and complement her on it. Why? Because it's nice, looks good on a woman, it's a glory to her.

Nothing whatsoever about special powers, shekinah this or shekinah that.

What's even more interesting, is people seem to miss the fact that Paul's statements about a woman having long hair or a man having long hair are simply 'evidences' he brings up to support his argument. Thus, long hair on a woman or short hair on a man is not even what Paul was putting forward. Long hair was 'exhibit D' or something like that in a list of reasons supporting his teaching, found in the opening verses of the chapter.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

I think this is one of the most misunderstood verses by many Pentecostals.

They view "glory" here as some sort of God given power.

This is really more about how women feel...her hair, to her, is her pride and joy...her HAIR is a source of pride

That is how I understand that scripture too. It speaks of the femininity that long hair represents. However, there are cultures with women whose hair do not grow long, at least not in the western sense.

I also view this scripture through the lens of the culture and time period in which it was composed.

Not all women have long hair. The Bible's casting of shame on women with cut hair is STRICTLY CULTURAL. It was never presented in the way that some Christians present it.

The language of the Bible reads, "If it is a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered".

A woman with shortened hair is not a source of shame.

Some women actually look more attractive with certain haircuts and styles.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

That is how I understand that scripture too. It speaks of the femininity that long hair represents. However, there are cultures with women whose hair do not grow long, at least not in the western sense.

I also view this scripture through the lens of the culture and time period in which it was composed.

Not all women have long hair. The Bible's casting of shame on women with cut hair is STRICTLY CULTURAL. It was never presented in the way that some Christians present it.

The language of the Bible reads, "If it is a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered".

A woman with shortened hair is not a source of shame.

Some women actually look more attractive with certain haircuts and styles.

1Co 11:5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.

The woman who prays or prophesies uncovered 'dishonours her head'. Why? BECAUSE it is the same as if she were shaven. Paul right there establishes that it is a shame for a woman to be shaven, otherwise his argument makes no sense whatsoever.

1Co 11:6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.

He then says, 'for' meaning 'because of what I just told you in verse 5'. For if the woman will not be covered, then let her ALSO be shorn. This proves two things: First, that being uncovered is something distinct from having her hair cut off. Second, that since it is a shame for a woman to be shaven, and since a woman who prays uncovered is dishonouring her head, she might as well cut her hair off if she's going to pray uncovered.

BUT, if it is a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, then let her be covered. That is to say, if it would be too much for her to be sheared like a sheep and lose all that hair on her head, then she best be covered.

The whole argument requires that it be shameful for a woman to have her hair cut off, otherwise his argument is senseless.

As for cultures where women's hair simply does not grow long, that doesn't change the fact that 1)if a woman has long hair it is a glory to her, and 2)that it would be shameful for a woman to have her head shaved or her hair shorn off, and finally 3)a woman who prays or prophesies uncovered dishonours her head.

[Steve Epley]

Paul wasted 16 verses for nothing. I wonder how many other 16 verses have no relevance today?