Both progressive and traditional types of Christians blatantly disobey the Bible... and this example about men and women proves it.

I’d like to engage, but I suspect the op is a bomb thrower, who splits after tossing a bomb, and doesn’t address the various points made.

I also think it’s much about how he wanted everyone to see his artwork.

On the subject itself, we have freedom in Christ, if someone thinks it’s sin for a woman to pray uncovered, that’s on them.

The very interesting, and completely ignored nugget in the text is the part about “because of the angels”.

Why would an angel care if a woman’s head was covered while praying to God?

So in 1 cor 1:4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.

All the men must have to be bald if it is talking about hair

Paul used hair as an example from nature, like we all do when explaining things we will use an example, it is like such and such....

Anyhow, the angels care because they're always watching and reporting back to God to ensure that everything is being done decently and in order.

It's not just in India, it is the worship practice in the Eastern Orthodox Churches even today. It was the practice in the Catholic Church until 1983.

In short, this is a non-issue today.

Quite the opposite. Since you put a red x on my post, you have made it clear that you disagree with God, not me or anyone else who interprets that passage as it should be interpreted. This is called picking and choosing what we believe, rather than believing what God says, since all Scripture is given by inspiration of God.

Outward expressions of honour are only of benefit if they are truly reflective of what is happening in the heart. Otherwise it is most likely hypocrisy at play. One could argue that if the heart was sound and the mind acted in concert with it, and godly action followed, wouldn't any other parallel expression be superfluous? What if it was an impromptu meeting, and there was no headwear to be found. Should we force the woman from our midst?... I don't think so!

Talk about cherry picking........ well, more like failing to understand Scripture.

GOODNESS........

A womans LONG HAIR IS HER COVERING!!!!!!

Please enjoy your time here on CC, but, hey, before you begin to teach us, be sure you understand Scripture correctly..........

Christ unites and saves, Paul divides. In every thread i see, when Paul is mentioned, division is certain to follow. Now why is that?

Blessing

Don't care about the artwork. Irrelevant to the topic. So what's the point in posting it?
Wikipedia is your source? 😂😂 find a better source.
I'll also pass on modern prophets.
That you showed up to this site and proclaimed that you're right and everyone else is wrong doesn't make you special or enlightened. It makes you average, typical and causes you to blend in with that multitude of others on this site with the same attitude.
You need to do better.
They "pretend" the scriptures mean something else. What an arrogant tool. So worried about head coverings while you reek with pride and raising yourself above others.

Some have no care for art. Just like some do not care for music. I understand. To me, the point of me making the art and posting the art is worship, making sacred spaces. We do this with art, architecture, music, speech, actions... and, for some, even our posts at forums. Like someone will sing a song about our Lord for others to hear, and maybe join in, I make art. It is one of the ways I worship and point others to God.

If you pass on modern prophets, and I am no such of a thing, this should mean you accept the original ones, like Paul, who teaches us about head covering in worship. Yes, listen to him. Not me. And if you read the early church writings, and the church fathers, and even the reformed theologians, like Calvin, Wesley, Luther, etc., they agree with Paul, as they all should. Well, rather it is the Holy Spirit through Paul.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_head_covering

And , yes, Wiki is often a bad source. On this subject though, Wiki did well. I think Wiki did such a good job because they enjoy making the church look bad. Wiki goes into the scripture of head coverings. Wiki points out how the majority of scholars agree on the head covering. Wiki points out how the church practiced head covering until the 1960's, until the sexual revolution and feminist pride came against the worship practice. Wiki points out the denominations that still worship this way.

Wiki does all this because it screams out loud that most of us in the west are hypocrites, as we often do not follow our own Bible... and so no one should. Abash we should stand, but rather, we call each other names, showing our immense need for Christ.

View attachment 240848

There's more going on with this passage than most modern readers understand. The gulf of cultural (and scientific) change has obfuscated Paul's original meaning, and veiled the scandal that he addressed in this chapter.

In short, this is a non-issue today.

I have studied the views voiced in the books, journals, papers, and podcasts even. I even know of the ones that are "nuts" (if you have read that one, you will get the pun that pertains to semen, LOL). None of those opinions matter. We should follow holy scripture, and not deconstruct, deform, or dismiss it.

It does not matter that there has been cultural (and scientific) change, and I will back it up with the example of foot washing. We no longer do this in society. We no longer have servants that wash feet. And, we do not wear sandals in a dusty land. Yet, as a worship practice, we still occasionally wash feet. Even the Pope. I do not know if you have ever done this. If the Lord leads you to do this, obey, then I think you will understand. The practice of head covering in worship is like that. We should do it in obedience to holy scripture. If we deem it a "non-issue" and throw out the practice, it has a cascading effect, and other things will get thrown out. This is no bueno.

No. She would be silent that day. Silence can be a thing of beauty, reverence, awe.

No. You are missing something. Paul is using the natural order , our hair, to explain that creation itself reveals to us also this about head coverings that the Holy Spirit is teaching us. You should read again, starting at verse 13. Paul writes u-n-c-o-v-e-r-e-d, in verse 13. And, there is no custom in all the churches of God where she is uncovered , again we see that same word in verse 16.

If Paul hadn't written verse 15b, your conclusion would be correct. Because he did, it isn't.

I am new here. Please help me unpack this, and tell me why do you think most ignore this part of the Bible? First, here is some art I made. It's based upon my wife, wearing a head covering as she prays and prophesies.


It looks like we all cherry-pick the Bible. Even those of us that consider ourselves to be hardcore Bible believing Christians of the traditionalist type. We like to point out how progressive Christians deconstruct, deform, or dismiss certain scriptures. It is strange that most of us western Christians do the same thing with the first part of 1 Corinthians 11.


The Corinth Church was out of line because they were not following the traditions that Paul previously taught them. He sent a letter reminding them that men should not cover their heads and women should cover their heads when they pray or prophesy. He also had instructions about the Lord's Supper. This is not about fashion nor food... but liturgy and proper worship.

In verse 16, it is written that the churches of God do not have a custom of a woman praying with her head u-n-c-o-v-e-r-e-d. So for centuries after Paul's letter women covered their heads in church... all the way until the sexual revolution and the feminist movement starting in the 1960's. Now, only certain denominations follow the instructions. Most Western churches ignore these holy scriptures. The people I talk to about this mostly have never heard of it. Or, they pretend that the scriptures mean other things, like it is about women having long hair, or that the letter was ONLY for the Corinthians, or it was a cultural thing of that time, or some other untrue thing. They skip that part of the scripture and only give attention to the part about the Lord's Supper.

Here is a pretty good article that explains the background and history:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_head_covering

You might think that it is not a big deal if a guy wears a ball cap in church or if a woman does not cover her head. But head covering is not something Paul briefly touched on casually with a single sentence, like the "holy kiss" or "drink a little wine to help your stomach". See how Paul elaborated on the theology of it. The fact that Paul wrote that all the churches practiced this means that it is not merely an instruction unique to the area of Corinth. ADDITIONALLY, and more importantly, the fact that he connected this practice with creation, the natural order, and the Angels makes it a universality. After all, Angels are every time and place. THIS IS NO SMALL THING. A man not covering his head and a woman covering her head, this is an act of worship that shows that we are submitted to God.

It seems that we have now set aside holy scripture, mainly for feminist pride. And this distortion or deconstruction of holy scripture for an agenda has made the way for gay pride to do the same thing. Do we accept the writings of Paul, or just the parts we like? So, was the Holy Spirit speaking through Paul? If we listen to Paul when it comes to the gifts of the spirit, the Lord's Supper, and on and on, why not about head coverings?

And the next thing you know, many Christians will cherry-pick the words of Christ, and ignore His definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman (Matthew 19:4-6). Wait, that is already happening....