Our church today, as we know has become a mixed divine institution. Some practices in church are Bible based and some are not. Let's look at a specific area of reform that is almost universally ignored with the S.D.A church. The often used "her hair is her covering" is here shown to be folly.

What does Paul mean in 1 Corinthians 11 concerning the woman covering her head? Does not verse 15 show that the hair is her covering?

Answer:

"But I would," says the Holy Spirit, "have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God." 1 Cor. 11:3.

Note the order in which divinity and humanity are linked: God, Christ, the man, the woman. Thus it is that "every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head [God]. But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head [the man]: for that is even all one as if she where shaven.

For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn [that is, if a woman will not wear a hat, then let her cut off her hair]: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered [let her wear a hat]. For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man." 1 Cor. 11:4-8.

This scripture plainly teaches that a man ought to take his hat off when praying or prophesying (teaching the Scriptures), while the woman should put hers on.

One could not logically conclude from 1 Cor. 11:15 that the woman's hair is the covering referred to. If such were the case, then logically the man should shave his head in order to make the distinction between the two.

Moreover, if the woman's hair is the covering required, then why would the Scriptures say she is to wear it when "praying or prophesying"? What else could she do? And could she take off her hair (covering) when not praying, unless she wore a wig?

The Scriptures therefore make it clear that any religious occasion which requires the man to take his hat off, requires the woman to put hers on. (Answerer, vol. 5, Q-119)

Yet the Jewish men always cover their heads with a prayer shawl, and one of those little round caps when they go to worship.

The text:
"every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonours his head"
more likely means -- the men are to cover their heads to show they don't hold their head as worthy of honor, but give that honor to the true head which is God.

This garment [Tallit] (prayer shawl) was commanded of God.

When a Jewish man wraps himself in his Tallit (prayer shawl), he symbolically places himself under God’s sheltering love. Indeed, when he dons the Tallit (prayer shawl), he recites Psalms 36:7, 9.


"TALLIT prayer shawl. Originally the word meant "cloak." This was a rectangular mantle that looked like a blanket and was worn by men in ancient times.
Num. 15:38–41 explains that at the four corners of the tallit tassels were attached in fulfillment of the biblical commandment of zizit.

No law requires it. "But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God." It was merely a custom. Customs do not count as commandments.

Mountain man-- "No law requires it."

Can you find a law that says we must sigh and cry for the abominations done in the midst, in order to get the seal of God? Or that if we have "one spot or stain" on our character, we don't get sealed? No law says these things.

Yet BOTH of those are required or we cannot inherit eternal life.

"The great ISSUE so near at hand WILL WEED OUT those whom God has not appointed, and He WILL HAVE a pure, true, sanctified ministry prepared for the latter rain." (B-55-1886)

Customs, like head coverings, do not count as commandments.

Of course it is not a Commandment. Agreed.

But is "sighing and crying" a Commandment? You going to ignore it because it's not?

We have two duties from God-- Fear God and keep His Commandments (Ecc. 12:13)

I'd rather be on the side of caution than presumption. We are told to sigh and cry for the abominations done in the church. I don't want to take a chance that this would be an act displeasing to Him.

God has order, God, Father, Christ , Son, Man, Woman. This covering shows proper respect for the woman's head -- Man.

Do we men pray with a hat on? Of course not. If we do, it shows ignorance of God's word and dis-honor to our head-- Christ.

Paul concluded - We have no such custom, neither the churches of God.

So you're saying for the woman's "head" to be "covered", her husband needs to wear a burqa or something?

That's modern custom.
The Jews would not think to pray or read from scripture without having their heads covered.
Which would mean Jesus Christ Himself, who often read in the synagogues, would have done so with His head covered.

To often we look at these issues through the eyes of legalism, rather than looking for the principles they teach.

The issues of head coverings involve PRINCIPLES!

It's not so much whether the head is covered or uncovered, BUT WHAT WE COMMUNICATE when we do so.

For the Jewish male, covering his head with a prayer shawl during worship signified reverence and humility and sensing the glory of God's presence in worship.

However, the shawl had other purposes as well --
It represented their Identity, what tribe and family they came from. They were also supposed to have at least one blue thread -- signifying their connection with God. It was also a symbol of authority.

The priests and the wealthy would have longer shawls with a lot of blue threads showing their wealth and authority.

In the Roman world, men tended to have short hair and usually did not cover their heads. So a man with uncovered head was an accepted custom.

Paul tells the men that Christ takes the place of the shawl. (11:3) "But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ." Thanks to Christ's redeeming sacrifice, mankind can come boldly before the throne of God. Christ is his righteousness, and gives him his identity as a child of God.

Now one might expect Paul would say the same to the women, however, what women did with their hair and head held different social significance from what a man did with his.

In other words, what a woman did with her hair and head communicated something different to the people of her culture.

Women (Jewish as well as Greek) were expected to keep their hair bound up on their heads or covered over whenever they went out in public. It was a symbol of their married state.
For a woman to let her hair hang down and uncovered was telling people around her that she was "available" -- thus indeed it was an insult to her husband.
It would be regarded the same as if she had cut her hair short (the style of prostitutes)

The question is not what a woman does with her hair, but what she communicates to those around her by what she does with her head.

Customs have changed.
Paul's specific instruction are no longer relevant as specifics.
BUT THE PRINCIPLE is very relevant.
What message does our dress communicate to those around us?

Indeed, today a man wearing a baseball cap in church communicates a certain disrespect.
A woman in a mini skirt and low neckline communicates much the same message today as a woman with loose uncovered hair would have communicated in Paul's day.

But today women wearing hats tends to communicate a "pride of life" message. There is no social reason in our society that values hats in meetings for any other reason. I still remember back in the 50's especially when nearly all women wore hats of all colors, shapes and sizes to church -- I was still a young child back then trying to see through all the bobbing mass of finery to get a glimpse of the preacher.

The principle of that Biblical passage is to dress for worship in a manner that does not draw attention to self, or give a wrong message to the people around us. Our dress and hairstyle at worship is to be modest, simple but respectful quality (not our everyday work or play clothes) and communicates to others that we have come to worship our God.