If we follow those who subscribe to the doctrine of women wearing veils, then it can be argued that the most often cited verse is 1st Corinth. 11:5, which states: “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.” According to many of those who believe women ought to wear veils this verse supposedly implies that a woman’s uncovered head is a woman who does not wear a veil. Such a woman is either dishonoring God, their own physical head or her husband for failing to wear it which implies that they are in disobedience. Some have gone so far as to say it is a sin. Another assumption is that the woman being referred to already has long hair and since they conclude that the covering is a veil then it must be referring to an “additional” covering otherwise it would clash with verse 15 stating that God gave women long hair for a covering. Another conclusion is that women ought to be covered ONLY when praying and prophesying which would make it seem as though it were something that can be placed on or taken off like a veil. You’ve probably noticed by now it takes several assumptions for them to reach the conclusion that women ought to wear a foreign object on their heads, despite the lack of evidence. * Does the Bible really give a clear command that women should wear a veil? The first thing that everyone must understand when talking about this topic is that it DOES NOT say the word “veil “or any other physical headwear, as far as the KJV is concerned. It surely mentions that the woman’s head should be covered, and no one disputes this but it does not say that it should be covered with a veil, a shawl, a bonnet, a cap, or any other specific headwear. The verses in question within 1st Corinthians 11 mention the words, cover, covered, uncovered, and covering, but that does not mean we can translate this to mean a veil, a shawl, a bonnet, a cap, or anything else similar. In fact, it would seem more like an adverb rather than a noun. Nevertheless, the word “cover” is often unfortunately interpreted by head covering promoters to mean a veil above all other types of headwear, even if there is no evidence to prove that beyond a shadow of a doubt. To do so would mean that one is trying to read more into the verse than what is actually stated and is not truly seeking an exegesis of the Scriptures. Some have claimed that they are referring to a physical synthetic head covering because the Scriptures seem to indicate that there are two exclusive conditions in order to wear one and that is when a woman is either praying and/or prophesying. But does this interpretation stand up to logic? If we were to believe that under certain conditions a woman ought to wear a physical head covering, then it stands to reason that under OTHER conditions a woman should be able NOT to wear one. For example, if you are going to argue that a woman ought to wear a veil because the Bible claims there are two conditions, then it is logical to presume that any other condition would ALLOW them to be without one, like speaking in tongues, interpreting tongues, healing the sick, casting out devils, etc. Now if a head covering promoter should claim that there are MORE conditions, then they admit that there aren’t really “two” conditions thereby nullifying the two-condition argument. The reasoning behind why the “two-condition” argument is important for veil promoters is because if these words were actual conditions, then it would seem as though the covering were something that can be placed on or taken off. So even though it does not literally or EXPLICITLY say anything about putting on or taking off a veil. Veil promotors form this belief based on what they believe to be IMPLIED and not by a direct statement. Many people like to believe this because they ASSUME that praying and prophesying are two conditions instead of seeing them as mere examples. * Praying and prophesying were meant to be viewed as examples, not conditions… Now I can understand how someone can mistakenly conclude praying and prophesying as conditions in verse 5, on the surface, but once you read the rest of the verses in context one cannot reach that conclusion. For example, if the strongest argument is because there were conditions for women to wear veils because of verse 5 then why don’t we hear the same thing spoken of about men in verse 4? “Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.” Normally we do not hear the argument that men ought not to have their heads covered exclusively under two conditions as we hear for women as to why they should. I think it is because that would imply that they CAN have their heads covered under other circumstances like the examples I mentioned before as in speaking in tongues, interpreting tongues, healing the sick, casting out devils, etc. But I suspect a veil promoter would not go along with this. Then there is verse 7: “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.” So, there seems to be ANOTHER reason for men not to cover. Therefore, if the reason for men not to cover their heads in this verse is because he is the “image and glory of God,” then why even mention praying or prophesying in verse 4? Should a man not be covered under ANY condition since verse 7 overrides any supposed conditions? Shouldn’t that make you question that perhaps Paul was just giving a couple of examples? Verses 4 and 5 are basically the same except for whom they are directed yet when one hears the arguments by veil promoters it is typically about how verse 5 is conditional for women yet for men in verse 4 it is usually not spoken of. Again, isn’t it more likely that Paul was using the words praying and prophesying as examples in both verses? We can also get a sense that Paul was referring to praying and prophesying as examples if we read verse 13 when it only mentions the word praying and NOT prophesying. “Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?” If there were only two exclusive conditions, then why would he leave out prophesying? We can’t say he got tired in his writing as he mentioned both words in verses 4 and 5. So, what can we say about this? Just that Paul was giving us a couple of examples of how doing something HOLY or GODLY does not give a pleasant appearance if the woman is uncovered, meaning not covered in long hair and the same goes for men when their heads are covered in long hair since that is exactly one is supposed to understand when reading verse 14.

Jeff's wife speaking... The covering is a symbol of power on the woman's head which shows her submission to her husband and it is for the sake of the angels. Scripture teaches that if a woman is not covered when praying and prophesying, it is as if where shorn or shaven. We are asked the question, "Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?" And then Paul goes into the nature argument. There are quite clearly two coverings, long hair and a material covering for praying and prophesying.

Let's not try to amend the Bible to fit in our lives but let's amend ourselves to fit into the bible if truly we want to be Christians

Thank you Ben for taking the time to vlog for us :) I love your listening to your analysis and explanations. You are awesome!!! God bless :)

im not sure if you’ll see this but i wanted to say thank you so much. your videos are straight to the point and easy to understand. i appreciate your video and you. God bless ✝️✨

Love how you bring this into perspective because of the time period.

Wow I absolutely love ur content!!!!! Subscribed! U get straight to the point, quick and concise! Great work!

newbee here!! Thanks for this. Was reading this chapter and cannot understand anything. 😇 Godbless ur channel 💖

Thanks . This was a big debate back in the day . I remember a few woman in our church use to wear it.

That was awesome and it was clear and made a lot of sense. I was totally confused...but now I am found. Thank you. Keep up the good work for the Lord.

Thank you brother for this. Alleluia!

Thank you very much for that explanation. Learned a lot.

Wow , this dude just changed Bible word in two minutes & some of u like it because u actually don’t wanna follow that ☺️. Read by yourself... it’s very clear. ...& it doesn’t depend on your choice it His choice & u need to follow ( if u want).

Godbless you Pastor Ben!

Head coverings isn't in our culture because of the feminist movement in the early 1900s. Before that all woman wore fancy hats because of this verse. Imagine the Bible says you should wear a head covering and you somehow explain it away that you really don't need to before the feminist movement made it common.

this helped me a lot, thank you.

Thank you for this breakdown

Here’s my experience- for a couple of weeks I was reading my Bible and saying my night prayers and after enough time the Lord sent me a dream to let me know that I was not honoring him, and it is confirmed by the Bible. So instructions are in the Bible that we may know how to honor God. There are instructions for both gender’s so if you just want to do what you want, in the end the Bible will not defend you cause you didn’t have faith to follow the instructions of it. God has corrected me on dressing, has talked to my mom about wanting her to wear dresses, many other believers have heard from God about the outside adornment of themselves- God always brings us back to His commandments ☝️.

If we can just decide to stop doing some of its teachings: remember Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and today, and forever.

Hi, God does not change what is written afore time was written for our learning

And 1 Corinthians 11:10

I looked up every word in these scriptures about hair long hair did not translate out to uncut hair in the Jewish customs long hair for a woman was from the tip of her finger to the bend of her elbow was considered long hair and short hair for men was like a palms of his hand length. Is the strong's concordance not correct?

Times and fashion change but GOD does not change. Hebrews 13:8 (KJV) Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

People who say, "But Jesus had long hair" need to consider that they're most likely looking at a painting from the Renaissance and that the model in several of such portraits is Cesare Borgia, son of Pope Alexander VI, in the era when Popes could have a wife and family. Not to mention that Jesus wouldn't have appeared as a Spaniard but rather as a Palestinian Jew ("Palestine" comes from "Philistine" and it was the Romans who changed Judea to "Philistinia" as an insult to the Jews, based on their knowledge of the Torah/Old Testament. David the Giant-Slayer did in fact appeal to the Roman sensibilities and myths. Man vs the Titans and such.)

so man can wear coverings when praying or prophesying as long as they are not doing it publicly

Don't bring culture thing. Scripture Only.

God wouldn't even mention head covering in the Bible, if it was not important to Him... teaching that certain scriptures are no longer relevant for today, is UN-biblical....... God says, ALL SCRIPTURE is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, and for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be PERFECT, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. (there's no indication of "time" or cultural exemption mentioned in that verse at all) Jesus Christ is the same, yesterday, today and forever, and what was wrong to do hundreds or even thousands of years ago, is still wrong to do now. Also, as another commenter here has already pointed out, .."what was written afore time was written for our learning...! If they speak not according to this word, it is because there is NO light in them. Isaiah 8:20. We can't "KEEP" God's word by ignoring it, crossing it out, or exempting it because it doesn't suit us, ..we'd do well to remember that Man does not live by bread alone, but by "EVERY WORD ' that proceeds from the mouth of God.

I’m sorry but does this mean I can’t wear a durag?

Paul mentions the traditions he delivered to Corinth in verse 2. Back in chapter 4:17 Paul mentions that he sent Timothy to remind them of his ways that were taught in every church. It is hard for me to see it as local culture if the traditions were taught the same everywhere. Right?

why does God's law vary from culture to culture? why is God's law not universal? If breaking God's law is sin and the weight of sin is death then shouldn't the rules be the same for everyone? Or does God have favorites that he gives easy laws to and not so favored (I'm looking at you Corinthians) that he gives stricter laws to? Also IF this is a command that only applies to the Corinthians because it was written in a letter addressed to them then why should we assume that any of 1st or 2nd Corinthians apply to any of us? Seems like you're picking and choosing in God's divine infallible word.

Bible says long hair has been given to her as covering .

but it doesn't say in church, it says when praying/prophesying so , it's no specifically saying "in church"

I reckon because we are saved by faith alone works are secondary, although it is optimal it is the same as saying Grace before eating

This feels so similar to muslim

Thank you

Yo Ben, my girlfriend is Messianic Jew in faith says she prefers men w/biblically long hair..do you have any idea what she is talking about?

Well very bad interpretation as yous all cherry pick what you like. Explain vers 6 from 1 Corinthians 11. We know and even to this day the Jewish women cover their head so it wasnt just a thing for Corint.

Paul was talking about an additional covering.otherwise a man must wear a wig to take of when he is praying.

Can you do a video explaining 1 Corinthians 14:34

God forgive me if this is wrong and I pray in Jesus name that I be corrected if I am wrong. But he is right if you look at 1 corinthians 5 But a woman dishonors her head* the star means (or dishonors her husband) but if you continue to read it also says her glory is her hair that is been given as a head covering. (along those lines) So it also is best judgement. If you cover your head in church its fine nothing wrong with it. I might once I ever get married! :)

I offer another scholarly reason which is from Troy Martin and with physiology.

Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. Acts 2:38

U got a subscriber brother. God Bless

If it was only limited to the context of the Corinthian beleivers, then why does Paul say, " If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice-nor do the churches of God." ? He is saying here this is the practice of all churches of God because it was not just cultural. He is laying out a pattern of God and how we were created to represent or display that pattern on earth. This is an area where OUR culture Has supplanted the Word of God.

So regards men, what your saying is men dont wear hats when they preach or prophecy because it was a culture of that time? Correct?

❤❤❤❤

St. Paul tell us exactly to whom he was addressing his letter to the Corinthians: "To the church (assembly) of God which is in Corinth, to those consecrated and purified and made holy in Christ Jesus, [who are] selected and called to be saints (God's people), together with all those **who in any place** call upon and give honor to the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, **both their Lord** and ours:" 1 Corinthians 1:2 (AMPLIFIED BIBLE)

Is Paul not saying that it is a shame for a woman to not be under the authority of either her father or or husband? In Isaiah 4:1, the seven women are asking the man to take away their shame. It seems there is a dearth of men who are willing to marry them, much like what we see today in the church.

If it were about culture why did Paul reference nature instead?

The corinthians teaching on Head coverings were countercultural even in pauls day. Emporers wore a head covering before religious acts of worship, yet paul tells men not to cover. Its not a cultural thing otherwise paul would make a cultural argument, instead he argues from the order of creation. Unless ur willing to also say his apeal to the order of creation was also cultural on the issue of female pastors😬😜….idk how many other ways paul couldve argued it. 1 He says he taught them the tradition. 1 he apeals to the order of creation. 3 he apeals to nature. 4 he apeals to the sake of angels. 5 he apeals to modesty, calling it her power. 6 he apeals to the universal teaching of the church

1 CORINTHIANS CHAPTER 11 VERSE 5 TO 6 VERSE 5 : " BUT EVERY WOMAN WHO PRAYS OR PROPHESIED WITH HER HEAD UNCOVERED DISHONORS HER HEAD _ IT IS THE SAME AS HAVING HER HEAD SHAVED .' VERSE 6 : " FOR IF A WOMAN DOES NOT COVER HER HEAD , SHE MIGHT AS WELL HAVE HER HAIR CUT OFF , BUT IF IT IS A DISGRACE FOR A WOMAN TO HAVE HER HAIR CUT OFF OR HER HEAD SHAVED , THEN SHE SHOULD COVER HER HEAD .'

Paul never says anything about sexuality. Where do modern-day theologians even get this from? Paul only talks about headship. Paul is pretty blunt, if he was talking about sexuality he would have just said so like he did in so many other passages. Headship never changed. God, Jesus, man, women. So this hasn't change. Plus Paul says head covering is the practice in the churches of God, not just Corinth. (1 Cor 11:16) Plus Paul praises them for remembering what he has already taught them in vrs 2, and then instructs them about headship and authority in vrs 3. He even uses Adam and Eve as examples. Also the word for covering/ uncovering in 1 Cor 11:4, 5, 6, 7, and 13 all use the same word, katakaluptó/ akatakaluptos, which means to cover or veil or uncover, unveil. This same word is used for the veil in the Temple that separated mankind from Gods holiness and glory. The word used in verse 15 that Paul uses as an example for a woman's hair, is the word is "peribolaion" which means, a wrapper, mantel, cloak or covering. That which can be thrown around. (Think of women tossing their hair about.) These are not the same Greek words. We should use different English words to distinguish between the two.

Would you explain in depth Corinthians 11: 7 , 10 Thanks!

Dont make the lord's supper a buffet. So funny

Is it a sin for women to have short hair

"Is not instinct also teaching you that a man, when his hair is erect (qa-em standing), he has disgrace (or reproach)? And when a woman grows out (dam-rab-bai) her hair, she has praise (or glory); because her hair was given to her for (or in the place of) a covering (or veil). But if [any] one argues against these things, we don't have a custom like this, and neither [does] the churches of God." (1 Cor. 11:14-15 Peshitta). The Aramaic text says something quite different than the English translations and Dr. Lamsa's translation, which retained and polished up the KJV text here. The Aramaic text says that a man is not to have erect hair, NOT "long hair" (Lamsa, KJV). Qa-em means: “standing, erect and upright.” The next word after long is the word sa-ạra, meaning hair. The Aramaic text has two words here while the Greek text just has one word. Also, the Aramaic text of the next verse reads: , "And when a woman grows out her hair, she has praise (or glory) ..." Paul isn't relating a custom where a woman has to have long (Lamsa, KJV) hair; but that she should have hair, regardless of whether the length is short or long. Paul earlier had said that if a woman prays or prophesies when her head is unveiled, than she is equal to a woman that has her head shaved or shorn (1 Cor. 11:5). She shouldn't have a disfigured or bald head like a slave or captive (Deut. 21:12). Gri-a "shaved or shaved one" has both an adjective and a noun meaning. It can refer to a monk; or contemptuously, to a slave. That is why Paul said: "...but if it is a shameful thing (or hideous) for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered [with hair]. (1 Cor. 11:6)." I want to reiterate that Paul is discussing a "custom" that is non-binding on women. It is an opinion that he had that was based on the times. Paul hinted others may not agree with his opinion and hence this custom isn't obligatory or a command from God. Not much else is known about this custom. I personally don't mind if a woman has a bald head if she wants that. It's her choice and it isn't hurting anyone.

I like you, lol ur all like Pentecostals come on bring it lol.

David, Haman & other men covered their heads while mourning or when they were ashamed [humiliated] (2 Sam. 15:30; Esther 6:12; Jer. 14:3-4).So that could be one reason why a man praying with his head covered would be disgraceful.

Her hair is her glory, not everyone elses...cover your hair and head.

Sh 11 was talking about hair only head not talking about today time. Man made this change. Not going against you. Just trying to figure this out. In my area it’s a strong subject. With some anger. Yes anger.

If this is not cultural, what are we to make of "greet one another with a holy kiss"? I haven't seen very many Christian men do that.

So you're using the old testament to justify the new ok. Question so all the bible was speaking to a certain people, not us the question is why are we following the Bible?

Catholics have avoided this verse ridiculously.

Please clarify this for me, most of the things that were written in the Old Testament are not done and practiced after Christ right? Like offering a sacrifice to God by killing animals. Well about the story of Samson, it was written in the Old Testament. 1 Corinthians is New Testament.

The “covering” mentioned in 1corinthians 11 is not referencing a piece of fabric...it’s referencing hair. I think you totally missed it on this.

They Ben, thanks for the video. First one I've watched of yours. However I would have you go a bit deeper regards to the covering. It may be true about the culture, prostitutes and homosexual practice. However verse 4 and 5 is so clear in every English translation. Man should not cover. Women should cover...while praying for prophesying. Point is Paul does not say anything about the culture. He could. He does many other places. But he just doesn't here. There's much more to this. But look even at history up until very recently the practice was found. And still today the military, baseball teams church (hopefully) men who are covered uncover for prayer. Women do not. Rather women have had Easter bonnets, stylish hats and many other veils even when getting married, up until, you guessed it, very recently. If the culture is the argument, then it's the current culture post feminism in the 1960s that changed this ancient practice and now we today are feeling it and trying to rationalize

What it sounds like it is like when Jesus said you search the scriptures because in them you believe you have life but you refuse to come to me and being more righteous than the scribes. You can take in the bread and water of Yeshua and use it in a dishonorable way.

Learn about Soufism

It’s very much a cultural thing. Not necessarily that important for salvation

But it says in the word of God that the angels watch us or something like that this doesn't help sorry

This is why i left christianity ✝️ a long time ago just listen to this man says you dont need to cover your hair 😆 and if we go to 1 Corinthians 11:5-6 it says to cover you hair in his bible .. Then he says its for another group of people, so if its for another people why are u believing in the book that is talking to another group of people ?

I’m sorry but I have to disagree with you . I had my personal experience with God when I was led in my spirit and made it really clear whenever I come to into prayer in my alone time .. to always come to him in a head covering.. and when I’m at church.. He is the same yesterday, today and forever. God always talks and he shows us and I came from a background where I always pray uncovered until I started keeping his commandments which is his law.My changed from that point. We must understand the context.

So Jesus probably didn't have long hair?

He didn't realize when he mentioned the order of authority, the head of Christ is God.

Women dont go bald, men do, now dicern

Nothing changes the "Word of God" "3 But I would have you know, that the *head [Chief : Supreme] of every man is Christ; and the *head of the woman is the man; and the *head of Christ is God. 4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. 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. 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. 7 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. 8 For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. 9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man." 1 Cor 11:3-9 (KJV) 1 Corinthians 11:6 is the key verse. If she has no covering while assembling, then her hair should be cut off. So hair and the covering cannot be the same thing. Indeed, this is proven by the man not to have a 'covering' on his head when praying to God. If hair was the 'covering' then he would have to cut his off each time before prayers, or of course be bald.

It was only a cultural thing, yet we see him making arguments from the natural and spiritual world? Come on man!

No scripture was read that support what he says. Did he read any scripture about Sampson? No. He said, "oh this one person in the bible had long hair, see see that means this part of the bible is wrong". You need to pray for understanding before you pick that book up again, sir.

This is so disappointing

Not cultural at all , even the Protestant fathers taught it wayyy after Corinthians /Paul ! The angels are still there ! The headship is still supposed to be there ! Most all women veiled or at least wore hats in all denominations before the hyped up feminist' movement in the 1960's bucked up against anything and everything male headship , so as most churches do thru time is end up submitting to the dictates of the secular culture around them as not to offend out FEAR OF MAN !

Jesus: don't judge outwardly, why do you worry about clothes. Become one flesh with your wife. Modern "Christ"ians: PUT ON YOUR HEAD SCARF AND SIT DOWN WOMAN

the husband has to submit and obey his wife just as much as the woman her husband 1 cor 11;16 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God. it was the tradition and custon and culture of those times. nothing else in 1 pet 3 we read about women coming to the church meetings with plaited hair so women did not cover the hair. thirdly, the Bible says that everything has to be gounded on at least TWO witnesses. there is only ONE place in the Bible where you read about the head covering and that is also not very clear since we read in the very passage that the hair of women is their covering. in the new testament we dont follow the traditions of old. we follow Lord Yeshu who set us free from the external things. now the reality is Christ Himself. not the things on the outside those who wear head coverings rely on the Flesh which is SIN and that is the WRONG REBELLION... thats bondage to sin...

This guy is lying

She was right. You are wrong and deceived.

Women had long hair down to the ground in biblical Times . Men with shoulder hair length is normal in biblical Times. Yeshua does have shoulder hair length hair. 2 Samuel 14:26 Absalom Cut his hair. Its okay for men to have shoulder length hair but not to have UNCUT hair like the women used to have ( hair 3 feet on the ground ; never cut!

This is more or less Paul's personal opinion. As he states in verse 16, also in verse 13 he tells us to judge among ourselves. When you put the whole of 1 Cor. 11:1-16 into context I think perhaps most are missing the point, it's really not about head coverings or the length of ones hair... but rather we, men and woman, are in need of each other. If you care to give it a reread with a focus on verse's 11&12 I wonder if you'll be able to gleam this from the whole of the passage and learn what's really being said. Many seem to teach incorrectly on these verses and make much of something that just isn't so.

Women had long hair down to the ground in biblical Times . Men with shoulder hair length is normal in biblical Times. Yeshua does have shoulder hair length hair. 2 Samuel 14:26 Absalom Cut his hair. Its okay for men to have shoulder length hair but not to have UNCUT hair like the women used to have ( hair 3 feet on the ground ; never cut!