Hi Carlos,
Context is always important to understanding meaning. Understand that this is a church with practically no redeeming quality, according to the content of the entirety of the letter of 1 Corinthians.
The fact is, that this is mostly a group of reformed pagans who were tied into the local religions and local religious practices which are ESSENTIAL to understanding the meaning in these verses. Do some research into the major religious temple in the area at the time of the writing of this letter. You will find that the major religious group in the area was completely run, and operated by women who accepted absolutely no input, or authority from men at all. They were in charge. They ran it, no man EVER had any say, and the sold sexual favors to men for income to their temple.
But it wasn’t just that they were not under the authority of any men, but that they had a symbol of their rejection of all male authority, … they shaved their heads, and left them bald and shining for all the world to see that no man had authority over them.
Here’s the thing. At this time, if you walked down the street, and were bald, and were female, it didn’t mean that you were undergoing chemo therapy. It didn’t mean that you had just donated your long hair for a wig for other women undergoing chemo either. Yes, there were some women who didn’t want to be associated with those pagan ****** that worked in the temple. They kept their hair long, and kept their heads covered. In the context in which this letter was written, this passage had one SPECIFIC meaning, and Paul, and the people receiving the letter, knew exactly what it was, and exactly how it applied. If you understand this background, and look at the context, flow of thought, flow of discussion, diagram the points made, … all of this makes perfect sense.
1Co 11:1 Be imitators of me, just as I also am of Christ. 2 Now I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you.
First point: This is not something you can make up as you go. You cannot change what I am delivering to you to fit it in with what you are familiar with, and alter it to make it fit with the religious practices you are used to. You are to “imitate me, as I am imitating Christ.”. Now for the praise, “You remember me in everything and hold fast to the traditions, just as I delivered them unto you.” But, there is still an issue where they are not quite getting it.
3 But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.
Unlike the religion they were familiar with, and were probably all involved with, things are different. Women are not the “Head” of the Christian religion. Women are not in charge and ruling over men. Women are not in charge with the men coming to them for spiritual guidance. The chain of authority, and headship, in the church, AND IN THE FAMILY, is not Goddess, Women, Men, Children, as they are used to. Remember, the previous sentence is about the chain of authority. We haven’t changed topic. This is on the same EXACT issue.
4 Every man who has something on his head while praying or prophesying disgraces his head.
Ok, so what, in this society, does a man wearing a hat have to do with disgrace to anything in this society? Answer: Nothing. Look into that pagan religion in Corinth issue again. Guess what the men did. They covered their heads to signify that they were under authority. The authority of who? The women heads of the religion. No hat, or head covering, no access to God, and no “service”. This isn’t a Jewish thing, this is a local culture thing. What do Hassidic Jews wear on their heads? Has that ever changed? Nope. Keep in mind that Paul isn’t going to “change” what was established all along, but going to affirm that things are to continue to be done “Just as the law also says.”, in chapter 14.
5 But every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying disgraces her head, for she is one and the same as the woman whose head is shaved.
So what is Paul saying about a woman who refuses to have her head covered while prophesying? What statement is the woman making in this culture, in this time period? Look back at verse 3. That’s the same topic we are still on. What does Paul say should happen if the woman won’t cover her head while prophesying? Why? What does having a shaved head signify? What is Paul saying, “If you are unwilling to show that you are under both the authority of the head of your family, and God, in the society you are in, then dress, act like, and show everyone that you are a temple *****, because there is no difference. You can’t go part way. Either get under authority, and live that way, or go all the way and be a *****. Pick one.”
6 For if a woman does not cover her head, let her also have her hair cut off; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, let her cover her head.
The problem is that these women understood that it was disgraceful to be a temple *****, or even to look like one. They knew this. Paul knew this. Paul draws a line in the sand, and says make a public proclamation that you are under male authority and live with that, or go the entire other way, and be a temple *****, but there is no middle ground in the church. This isn’t the only place where Paul draws a line in the sand and says, “This is it. If you don’t see it my way, you are out. I, nor anyone in the church, will recognize ANYONE with contrary teachings:
“1Co 14:37 If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord's commandment. 38 But if anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized.”
The context of the passage above is, … the same one, women, … submission, authority, spiritual headship / leadership, …
7 For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man.
Again, the meanings are based on the culture, society, and meaning of these things to the people writing, and being written to. What did head covering signify “Then”? What does head covering, or the lack thereof, signify, “Now”? Does it mean the same thing? When you see a woman in church today without a shawl, or hat, do you automatically think, completely out from under all headship and authority? When you see a woman with a shawl, or hat, do you immediately think, that woman is under the headship and authority of God and her husband? If you see a woman with little or no hair, do you think, “Temple Harlot”? What does head covering signify? What does baldness signify? Ok, that’s the meaning NOW. What was the meaning then.
The goal is to get to the meaning, and translate EXACTLY what that meaning is, to the EXACT SAME meaning today. How would a woman show that she really didn’t want to be under her husband’s, or father’s authority today? Telling them, “No”. would be one way, right? How about if others know what the husband’s or father’s will is, but see the wife or daughter acting contrary to that in public? How about if they just make decisions without their husband’s or father’s opinion at all?
Now think about it. If all the women wear long hair, and hats or shawls, and refuse to do what their father’s and husband’s will is, refusing their headship, does the hair make a difference? Does having chemo therapy and losing your hair now mean that you are rebellious and a *****? Of course not. None of that has meaning in this society. In some societies, it’s being willing to walk behind their husbands. In other’s it’s having a ring in their nose. In others, it is something else. The point is this, ladies, let all of your public displays show that you are both under your husbands or fathers authority, and under God’s as well. If not, put on a short skirt, way too much makeup, and walk back and forth on a street corner on Van Burin.
What, you didn’t get that last reference? I worked for the Sherriff’s department in Phoenix for a while. The local context is that that is the street where you could always arrest some hookers in Phoenix. You may not have caught it, but anyone who has lived here for over 30 years would have understood exactly what I said and meant. That’s the point. It wasn’t written to you, with your local customs, religious practices, … and to accurately translate the meaning, we must translate that meaning to what fits fully in the local cultures we are in. That’s what Paul did. That’s what Christ did with His illustrations. “Be imitators of me as I am of Christ.”, is how this starts.
It doesn’t end here though. Paul doesn’t want the men thinking that just because they are now, “in charge”, and that that is God’s plan, that they are superior to women in any way, shape or form. It isn’t because we “deserve” headship or authority. It isn’t because women are incapable. It’s simply because that’s the way God designed it. Being out from under authority is always a bad thing. Being a bad authority is always a bad thing as well. It doesn’t change God’s plan, and regardless of the role we are assigned by God, He wants us to be the best, “At our assigned role”, that we can be.
8 For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man; 9 for indeed man was not created for the woman's sake, but woman for the man's sake. 10 Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. 11 However, in the Lord, neither is woman independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. 12 For as the woman originates from the man, so also the man has his birth through the woman; and all things originate from God. 13 Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? 14 Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him, 15 but if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her? For her hair is given to her for a covering.
Again, keep in mind the difference n culture and society. In a society where long hair indicated rebellion to male authority, and God’s authority, and that you were advertising that you were a *****, is God saying you should try and look like a *****? No, of course not. Why is it right in the society this was written to? Why is the opposite wrong, in the society this is written to? Now, when you go to a new location, use illustrations that fit the culture, the society, the practices, … that convey that even if, in your culture, women are considered to be not only equals, but the spiritual leaders, the spiritual heads, the heads of the family, in charge over men, … that that cannot continue, and that if they would be ashamed to dress and act however ****** do, in church, then they should be ashamed to do anything that might convey that they are out from under the authority and headship of their husbands, or their fathers(Male patriarch of the family), if they have no husband. Husbands, you should be afraid to display any behavior, dress, cultural sign, … that you are not in authority over the women in your family, and that you are not the head of your family.
