Lessons #375 and 376
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ 1. It is best to use this note after you have listened to the lessons because there are +
+ comments given in the actual delivery not in the note. +
+ 2. The Bible abbreviations are as follows: CEV =Contemporary English version, +
+ CEB = Common English Bible, ESV= English Standard Version, +
+ GW = God’s Word Translation, ISV = International Standard Version, +
+ NAB=New English Bible, NASB= New American Standard Bible, +
+ NEB= New English Bible, NET = New English Translation, +
+ NLT = New Living Translations NJB = New Jerusalem Bible, +
+ NJV = New Jewish Bible, TEV = Today’s English Version. +
+AMP = Amplified Bible, UBS = United Bible Society +
+ 3. Notes have not been edited for grammatical errors. +
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Head Covering: Lessons from nature (1 Cor 11:3-16)
… 13 Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? 14 Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, 15 but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering. 16 If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice—nor do the churches of God.
Let me begin by refreshing your mind the message of this section of 1 Corinthians 11:3-16 that we have been considering is that Men should not have their head covered during prayer and likewise women who wear their hair the way God has given it to them, but they should cover it if they either cut or shave it. We had stated that expounding this message involves understanding of three parts knowledge the Holy Spirit through the apostle wants us to have. The first part concerns the concept of hierarchy given in verses 3 to 10. The second involves the relationship between men and women given in verses 11 and 12, from which we learned that there is equality in the standing of believers – male and female – before God in Christ Jesus and that each contributes to the mission of the church of Christ in such a way not to disregard the order in God’s creation of men and women. The third concerns lessons learned from nature given in verses 13 to 15. A first lesson we considered is that wearing a long hair is a disgrace to a man in that such a practice puts a man in situation that he would be mistaken for a woman and therefore he would be doing something that is unacceptable to others. He would put himself in a position that he would be thought of in a negative light as not respecting the generally accepted norm. Then we digressed to support our assertion that depending on the context, the same action may be interpreted differently in the Scripture. I am saying that we have in the Scripture situations where an action is considered a sin, but the same action is not considered a sin in another context. Our digression is because the wearing of long hair in a man is interpreted differently from the same wearing of long hair on a woman. It is with this different interpretation that we begin our study this morning.
That the Holy Spirit wants us to know that wearing hair long in a woman means something different from a man doing the same thing is introduced with the first word of 1 Corinthians 11:15 but. The conjunction “but” is translated from a Greek conjunction (de) that is used to connect one clause to another, either to express contrast or simple continuation. It is translated “and” when a simple connective is desired between clauses. When there is a perceived contrast between two clauses it is translated “but.” It may be translated now” when it is either used to link narrative segments or to indicate a transition to something else. Of course, there are more usages of the particle but in 1 Corinthians 11:15, it is used as a marker of contrast with the meaning “but” to indicate that wearing of long hair by a woman has an opposite significance to that of a man wearing the same. By the way, it is because of our Greek word translated “but” in our verse that was the reason we argued that a Greek particle (men) used in verse 14 that was not translated in the NIV that may be used as a marker of emphasis with the meaning “indeed” should be translated “on the one hand.” Thus, we said that the Greek particle used in verse 14 is used in such a way that it is paired with the Greek conjunction that began verse 15 so that the pair leads to the structure of the two verses as “on the one hand … on the other hand.” Hence, we know that verse 15 contrasts what is stated in verse 14.
The contrast between verses 14 and 15 is concerned with how one wears hair. In verse 14, a man wearing a long hair is interpreted negatively but wearing the hair long is interpreted positively if done by a woman. It is this positive evaluation of a woman wearing her hair long that is given in the clause of 1 Corinthians 11:15 that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory. This clause admits that it is not a given that all women would wear their hair long since some may not. We say this because the word “if” is translated from a Greek conjunction (ean) that is used as a marker of condition with the implication of reduced probability. The apostle used it to state what is generally expected to occur, in that women would wear their hair long although it is possible that some may not. Nonetheless, when what is generally expected to occur takes place, such occurrence is evaluated positively. But before we get to it, we should observe that the Scripture does not say much positively about a woman’s hair. Most of the references to women’s hair are negatively. For example, a woman was to loosen her when she appeared before a priest because the husband suspects her of adultery as we read in Numbers 5:18:
After the priest has had the woman stand before the LORD, he shall loosen her hair and place in her hands the reminder offering, the grain offering for jealousy, while he himself holds the bitter water that brings a curse.
The Hebrew is not clear as what exactly the priest should do to the woman’s hair, that is the reason our English versions translate this verse differently. For example, the CEV instead of the verbal phrase of the NIV loosen her hair reads remove her veil while the Revised edition of the NAB reads uncover her head. Regardless of how the Hebrew is translated, one thing is clear, it is that the woman is humiliated by something done to her hair. The same concept of humiliation of a woman by doing something to her hair that is conveyed in the punishment that the Lord conveyed He would bring on the women of Jerusalem for their sinfulness as we read in Isaiah 3:24:
Instead of fragrance there will be a stench; instead of a sash, a rope; instead of well-dressed hair, baldness; instead of fine clothing, sackcloth; instead of beauty, branding.
The phrase instead of well-dressed hair, baldness indicates the judgment on the women of Jerusalem would be such that instead of beautifying themselves through the braiding of their hair or through some other careful styling of the hair, their hair would be shaved off. Again, that would lead to humiliation of the women. In NT, the instruction is for believing women not to be so much occupied with beautifying their hair at the expense of their spiritual life as that is what is implied in the instruction of 1 Peter 3:3:
Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as braided hair and the wearing of gold jewelry and fine clothes.
The braided hair refers to the plaiting of hair that was an art which was very popular among Greek and Roman ladies, with the braided hair rising some inches above the head, and often intertwined with chains of gold or strings of pearl. What is clear then is that a woman’s hair is part of her beauty or how she beautifies herself. There is nothing wrong with a woman beautifying herself, but the emphasis is as the Holy Spirit through Apostle Peter stated that a believing lady should be more concerned with beautifying herself spiritually, that is, she should be more concerned with inner beauty than outer beauty that is concerned with the styling of her hair.
In any case, the positive evaluation of a woman having or wearing her hair long is given in the sentence of 1 Corinthians 11:15 it is her glory. What does the apostle mean by stating that a woman’s hair is her glory? To answer this, we need to consider the word “glory.” It is translated from a Greek word (doxa) that may refer to the state of being magnificent and so means “splendor, greatness” so the word is used to describe the greatness or splendor of the kingdom of the world that Satan offered to Jesus during his temptation of Him as recorded in Luke 4:6:
And he said to him, “I will give you all their authority and splendor, for it has been given to me, and I can give it to anyone I want to.
The word may mean “honor, prestige,” as the Lord Jesus used it to describe a person who seeks his own honor or prestige as stated in John 7:18:
He who speaks on his own does so to gain honor for himself, but he who works for the honor of the one who sent him is a man of truth; there is nothing false about him.
The word can mean the condition of being bright or shining, hence means “brightness, splendor, radiance.” In a physical sense, it is used to describe the brightness of the light that blinded the Apostle Paul when the Lord Jesus appeared to him on his way to Damascus to persecute Christians, as indicated in Acts 22:11:
My companions led me by the hand into Damascus, because the brilliance of the light had blinded me.
Under this meaning of shining, we have the concept of reflection of something. The word may mean “praise” as it is used to describe what Apostle Paul said he was not looking from people as we read in 1 Thessalonians 2:6:
We were not looking for praise from men, not from you or anyone else. As apostles of Christ we could have been a burden to you.
In our passage of 1 Corinthians 11:15, the word has the meaning of “honor,” that is, “favorable reputation in contrast to shame.”
The interpretation that the Greek word translated “glory” in 1 Corinthians 11:15 means “honor,” that is, “favorable reputation in contrast to shame” enables us to interpret what Apostle Paul meant when he said that a woman’s hair is her glory. He meant that a woman’s hair brings her the honor that is expected to belong to a woman because it is generally accepted that a woman’s hair is part of her beauty. In effect, in contrast to a man who wears long hair being viewed as not respecting the acceptable norm of men’s hair being worn short, the woman who wears her hair long has the respect of the society in that she has conformed to what is expected of women. Again, we should remind you that what the Holy Sprit conveyed through Apostle Paul is simply that a woman who wears her hair the way the Lord has given it to her maintains part of her beauty. For a woman to cut her hair short is not in keeping with how the Lord created her. As we have already stated, for most part there is usually a difference between men and women’s hair even if both are long. We are saying that God created men and women differently even in the matter of their hair although sometimes it may not be easily detected if both let their hair grow without cutting it. Nonetheless, there is a difference between men and women’s hair. Because there is something in creation that God intended so that men and women’s hair are to be different, most cultures consider the shaving of hair of women as abnormal. Hence, when a woman shaves her hair in some cultures it is usually as a sign of mourning the loss of a husband. That aside, regardless of the type of hair on a woman, God’s order in creation implies that men and women should wear their hair differently to differentiate them. Anyway, it is commendable for a woman to wear her hair as natural as the Lord had given it to her. You see, there are women that their hair will grow to certain length and no more, then such women should manage their hair in such a way to avoid cutting it short. As we have stated previously, it does not mean that a woman could not trim her hair to get even edges but that she should be careful not to cut her hair so it could be considered short when compared to how God has given it to her. Her hair remains that which beautifies her and distinguishes her from a man. It is this reality that is part of what it means that a woman’s hair brings glory to her. Therefore, a woman should maintain her hair in such a way that she does not cut it short.
Apostle Paul not only tells us that a woman’s hair gives her honor in that it beautifies her and causes her to conform to the expected norm of her society for women’s hair, but he goes on to state another important fact about the natural hair a woman received from God. The fact the apostle gives is in a sense a reason or an explanation for her hair being her honor or glory. We say this because the last clause of 1 Corinthians 11:15 begins in the NIV with the word for.
The word “for” is translated from a Greek word (hoti) that may mean “that” either as a marker of a narrative or discourse content or as a marker of an explanation. It may be used as a marker introducing direct discourse in which case it is not to be translated into English, but to be represented by quotation marks. Another usage of our Greek word is as a marker of a cause or reason so that it may be translated “because, since, for.” It is this latter usage that the word is used in our passage. In other words, the clause that begins with the word for in the NIV is to provide a reason a woman’s hair is her honor associated with her beauty. The translators of the CEB are explicit in their translation since they translated the second clause of verse 15 as This is because her long hair is given to her for a covering. Of course, the NIV reads For long hair is given to her as a covering. By the way, there is no adjective “long” in the Greek used here since the word “hair” is translated from a Greek noun (komē) that means “hair” without any reference to length. However, because of the Greek verb (komaō) used in verse 14 that means “to wear long hair, let one’s hair grow long” and because of the context, the Greek noun is rendered “long hair” in our English versions.
Be that as it may, the apostle in the last clause of 1 Corinthians 11:15 For long hair is given to her as a covering conveyed that God is the source of the long hair in a woman, given to her from birth. This is because of the word “given” is translated from a passive voice of a Greek verb (didōmi) that no doubt means “to give” in this passage. A passive voice is a grammatical voice that indicates that the subject is being acted upon, that is, that the subject is the receiver of the verbal action. The agent that produces the action is not usually supplied but implied or may be determined. In our clause, the implied agent is God since He is the One responsible for the coming of a human being into the world. That aside, we contend that it is implied that the long hair of a woman is given to her from birth. This is because the apostle used a perfect tense in the Greek. Unlike the English where tense is associated with time of the action in relation to the time of the utterance, the Greek associates tense with the kind of action. Thus, a perfect tense in the Greek is a verb tense used by the writer to describe a completed verbal action that occurred in the past, but which produced a state of being or a result that exists in the present usually in relation to the writer. The apostle was probably thinking of creation of woman when God acted in such a way that a woman from then on would have long hair. It is for this reason that we contend that a woman’s long hair is given to her from birth.
The apostle stated that the woman’s long hair is given to her as a covering. From a practical standpoint, this phrase is one that should caution us about being judgmental about a woman and a head covering. This is because the phrase is subject to two possible requirements about head covering. It could imply that a woman does not need a head covering in prayer or that she must be covered. Some believers judge others when their women wear head covering during prayer and vice-versa when the women do not. I am saying the verbal phrase should cause us to be cautious how we evaluate head covering today. That aside, the question is how to interpret the Greek phrase translated in the NIV as a covering.
Many of our English versions translated the Greek phrase as for a covering. The GW used the phrase in place of a covering in their translation of the Greek phrase while the ISV rendered it as a substitute for coverings. Before we get to the reason for the difference in the translation of the Greek phrase, we should note that although the ISV used the plural “coverings” the Greek is in the singular as reflected in majority of our English versions. Anyhow, the word “covering” is translated from a Greek word (peribolaion) that appears twice in the Greek NT. In its other usage beside our present verse, it means “robe, cloak” as it is used to describe God’s future action with the heavens in Hebrews 1:12:
You will roll them up like a robe; like a garment they will be changed. But you remain the same, and your years will never end.”
In our passage of 1 Corinthians 11:15, it means “covering,” that is, any manmade object for covering something else; especially used of clothing or for protection.
In any case, the differences in our English versions in translating the Greek phrase the NIV translated as a covering is because of the word “as” in the NIV is translated from a Greek preposition (anti) that has several meanings. The word may mean “for, in behalf of someone” to indicate a process of intervention as the word is used to indicate that Jesus gave His life as a ransom for the elect or to free them from sin as we read in Matthew 20:28:
just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”
The word may mean “instead of, in place of” to indicate that one person or thing is, or is to be, replaced by another as the word is used in the teaching of the Lord Jesus to encourage us to ask from our heavenly Father things that are needful, knowing that He would not give us anything that is not good as we read in Luke 11:11:
“Which of you fathers, if your son asks for a fish, will give him a snake instead?
The word may mean “for, as, in place of “to indicate that one thing is equivalent to another” as in the instruction of the Holy Spirit against repaying a person in the same way they have treated us, as we read in 1 Thessalonians 5:15:
Make sure that nobody pays back wrong for wrong, but always try to be kind to each other and to everyone else.
The Greek preposition may mean “because of, for the purpose” to indicate the reason for something as Apostle Paul used it to convey the reason unbelievers perish is that they rejected the truth of the gospel as we read in 2 Thessalonians 2:10:
and in every sort of evil that deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.
In our passage of 1 Corinthians 11:15, the Greek preposition is used to indicate that one thing is equivalent to another so that it may be translated “as” as we find in the NIV or “for” as in majority of our English versions. Regardless of which word is used, we should understand that the Greek phrase of 1 Corinthians 11:15 translated in the NIV as, as a covering means that a woman’s long hair is equivalent to a cloth covering or a veil.
The interpretation that a woman’s long hair is equivalent to a covering has led to two implications. The first is that despite the hair being a covering the woman should still wear a hair covering as per the apostle instruction in 1 Corinthians 11:6. Thus, those who hold to this view although reluctant to say so really mean that women in the church of Christ should wear head covering in worship. The second implication is that it is not required of a woman to have an additional covering on her head while she prays or prophesies in public worship of believers. Hence, the apostle in effect says to the Corinthians once a woman wears her hair long or should we say according to the natural length of her hair then she does not need additional head covering to satisfy the requirement for women to cover their head while praying or prophesying. This view is rejected by some on the ground that if the apostle meant this he should have said so directly. In response, it is to be noted that the apostle was probably going along with those who insisted on head covering so that in the end he would say that although a head covering is needed but God has already given that to a woman. Of course, it is worth noting that that the instruction of putting on a hair covering in 1 Corinthians 11:6 she should cover her head is given in the passive voice. There is the implication that the woman would not be the active participant in this instruction because God had already done so far. The apostle used the passive voice in his command in this epistle quite often for instructions that the recipient would not carry out by himself. For example, the instruction of circumcision is given using the passive voice in 1 Corinthians 7:18:
Was a man already circumcised when he was called? He should not become uncircumcised. Was a man uncircumcised when he was called? He should not be circumcised.
The sentence He should not be circumcised is to be carried out on the person by another. The form of the command is similar to what we have in 1 Corinthians 11:6 so it is likely that the Holy Spirit guided the apostle to write in such a way to hint at the fact that although a woman is required to cover her head but indeed God has actually done it so that all she has to do was to go along with the covering she already has so long as she does not shave her head.
Anyway, it is the second interpretation that we believe the Holy Spirit meant for the apostle to give, that is, that a woman’s God-given hair is her covering so that an additional covering is not necessary unless she shaved her hair. This explanation probably resolved the conflict that might have existed in the church of Corinth. Historical information available to us indicate that in the world of Corinth that those who had head coverings were women of low status in the society. The wealthy women or the upper-class women did not wear such head coverings. For if they did, the Holy Spirit through Apostle Paul would not have instructed believing women not to be carried away with their hairdo as we read in 1 Timothy 2:9:
I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes,
It would not make sense to instruct a woman who wore a head covering to be modest in the braiding of her hair. The situation was that the upper-class women in the Roman society and so in Corinth must have been eager to display their hairstyle. It is for this reason that the apostle would have instructed against being ostentatious regarding hairstyle. Well, the point is that the apostle by stating that a woman’s natural hair is a covering that God has provided, it is unnecessary for her to add another covering on top of her hair to meet the instruction that a woman should not pray or prophesy without a covering on her head.
A sad reality that every teacher of God’s word faces is that of believers’ rejection of the truth they were taught because it does not conform to what they want to hear or expect. You may think that only unbelievers reject truth they hear declared but that is not true. Believers can also reject truth taught by a teacher of God’s word. If this was not the case, the Holy Spirit through Apostle Paul would not have said to the Thessalonians that if they reject the apostle’s teaching that they would reject God’s word as we read in 1 Thessalonians 4:8:
Therefore, he who rejects this instruction does not reject man but God, who gives you his Holy Spirit.
So, believers do reject God’s word taught to them if they do not like it or if it does not conform to their expectation. Some believers make a showing of wanting to hear the word of God but once they hear it and it is not what they want to hear, they discredit the teaching and reject it. To me a good illustration of this kind of conduct is the people in Jerusalem in the waning days of the southern kingdom of Israel. The people acted as if they would accept whatever God says to them through Prophet Jeremiah so they went to him to inquire of what God would want them to do as we read in Jeremiah 42:5–6:
5 Then they said to Jeremiah, “May the LORD be a true and faithful witness against us if we do not act in accordance with everything the LORD your God sends you to tell us. 6 Whether it is favorable or unfavorable, we will obey the LORD our God, to whom we are sending you, so that it will go well with us, for we will obey the LORD our God.”
Jeremiah took up their matter to God who after ten days gave him the message to deliver to those in Jerusalem who promised to obey God’s instruction they would receive through the prophet. The message is described in Jeremiah 42:8–22:
8 So he called together Johanan son of Kareah and all the army officers who were with him and all the people from the least to the greatest. 9 He said to them, “This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, to whom you sent me to present your petition, says: 10 ‘If you stay in this land, I will build you up and not tear you down; I will plant you and not uproot you, for I am grieved over the disaster I have inflicted on you. 11 Do not be afraid of the king of Babylon, whom you now fear. Do not be afraid of him, declares the LORD, for I am with you and will save you and deliver you from his hands. 12 I will show you compassion so that he will have compassion on you and restore you to your land.’ 13 “However, if you say, ‘We will not stay in this land,’ and so disobey the LORD your God, 14 and if you say, ‘No, we will go and live in Egypt, where we will not see war or hear the trumpet or be hungry for bread,’ 15 then hear the word of the LORD, O remnant of Judah. This is what the LORD Almighty, the God of Israel, says: ‘If you are determined to go to Egypt and you do go to settle there, 16 then the sword you fear will overtake you there, and the famine you dread will follow you into Egypt, and there you will die. 17 Indeed, all who are determined to go to Egypt to settle there will die by the sword, famine and plague; not one of them will survive or escape the disaster I will bring on them.’ 18 This is what the LORD Almighty, the God of Israel, says: ‘As my anger and wrath have been poured out on those who lived in Jerusalem, so will my wrath be poured out on you when you go to Egypt. You will be an object of cursing and horror, of condemnation and reproach; you will never see this place again.’ 19 “O remnant of Judah, the LORD has told you, ‘Do not go to Egypt.’ Be sure of this: I warn you today 20 that you made a fatal mistake when you sent me to the LORD your God and said, ‘Pray to the LORD our God for us; tell us everything he says and we will do it.’ 21 I have told you today, but you still have not obeyed the LORD your God in all he sent me to tell you. 22 So now, be sure of this: You will die by the sword, famine and plague in the place where you want to go to settle.”
This message was not what the people expected. Therefore, their response was to discredit the prophet by telling him he was lying as we read in Jeremiah 43:1–4:
1 When Jeremiah finished telling the people all the words of the LORD their God—everything the LORD had sent him to tell them— 2 Azariah son of Hoshaiah and Johanan son of Kareah and all the arrogant men said to Jeremiah, “You are lying! The LORD our God has not sent you to say, ‘You must not go to Egypt to settle there.’ 3 But Baruch son of Neriah is inciting you against us to hand us over to the Babylonians, so they may kill us or carry us into exile to Babylon.” 4 So Johanan son of Kareah and all the army officers and all the people disobeyed the LORD’s command to stay in the land of Judah.
Bear in mind that the people had promised to do whatever God tells them, but they did not keep their promise because they heard what they did not anticipate or want to hear. The point is that when a teacher of God’s word delivers a teaching that people find difficult, they look for a way to discredit it. We find this truth demonstrated by those who heard the Lord Jesus teach in a figurative way that no one could have eternal life without faith in Him. He conveyed this in terms of eating His flesh and drinking His blood in John 6:53–58:
53 Jesus said to them, “I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him. 57 Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your forefathers ate manna and died, but he who feeds on this bread will live forever.”
Some of the people confessed that this was a hard teaching to accept since they did not understand Jesus’ teaching as we read in John 6:60:
On hearing it, many of his disciples said, “This is a hard teaching. Who can accept it?”
That aside, Apostle Paul expected this kind of response from some in Corinth regarding his teaching on the matter of head covering. For that reason, the apostle in a sense warned against its rejection as he summed his teaching in verse 16.
Recall that we indicated that women of the upper class in Corinth would have been those who went about without head covering while those of the lower class would have their hair covered. Thus, it would be women of the lower class that were probably pushing for head covering when the Corinthians were gathered in, say, one of the homes of the wealthier families. This being the situation, it is probably the case that those who would reject the apostle’s teaching would be the believing women of lower class while those of the upper class would not.
In any case, the apostle sums up his teaching about the subject of head covering by introducing a conditional clause in 1 Corinthians 11:16 If anyone wants to be contentious about this. The translators of the NIV omitted translating a Greek particle (de) the apostle used that is used to connect one clause to another, either to express contrast or simple continuation but in certain occurrences the marker may be left untranslated as adopted by the translators of the NIV and many English versions in this verse. Although it is often translated “but” in the English when there is a perceived contrast between two clauses as reflected in many of our English versions of this verse, but it has other meanings such as “now,” “then,” “and,” “so” when it is used to link segments of a narrative. It can also be used to indicate transition to something new. In our verse, the Greek particle is used to indicate the apostle is summing up his teaching while warning those who object to his teaching. This interpretation implies that we could translate the Greek particle used with the meaning “so” to indicate that the apostle is saying that based on the facts he has stated that he was stating a situation that every local church of Christ should follow.
The apostle was not naïve so he anticipated that some members of the local church in Corinth may not accept his teaching. This, he conveyed with the word “if” in the clause of 1 Corinthians 11:16 If anyone wants to be contentious about this. The word “if” is translated from a Greek particle (ei) that may be used as a marker of a condition, real, hypothetical, actual, or contrary to fact. Here the apostle used it to present a real situation that would likely take place in Corinth as the church hears the teaching of the apostle regarding the matter of head covering.
The objection to the apostle’s teaching that he expects is given in the clause If anyone wants to be contentious about this that literally reads if anyone wants/seems to be contentious. This is because of the Greek words used. The word “wants” is translated from a Greek verb (dokeō) that may mean “to be convinced” as it is used to describe the belief of Apostle Paul when he persecuted Christians as recorded in Acts 26:9:
“I too was convinced that I ought to do all that was possible to oppose the name of Jesus of Nazareth.
The word may mean to consider as probable so means “to think, believe, suppose, consider” as Apostle Paull used it to warn against self-deception in Galatians 6:3:
If anyone thinks he is something when he is nothing, he deceives himself.
The word may mean to appear to one’s understanding hence means “to seem” as Apostle Paul used it to describe some of those, he made known the gospel message he preached to the Gentiles, as we read in Galatians 2:2:
I went in response to a revelation and set before them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. But I did this privately to those who seemed to be leaders, for fear that I was running or had run my race in vain.
In our passage of 1 Corinthians 11:16, the word has the sense of “to be disposed.” Hence, the apostle recognized that there are those who are disposed to rejecting or being argumentative regarding the truth they have heard taught, especially if that is contrary to what they expected.
The disposition that the apostle anticipated to exist in some in the church in Corinth is to be evident in such individuals being argumentative or ready to fight because they heard truth they did not like to hear. Thus, the apostle described such individuals with the word contentious that is translated from a rare Greek word (philoneikos) that appears only here in the Greek NT that means “quarrelsome, contentious.”
The apostle did not directly state what it is that some in the church in Corinth may become contentious about, but the NIV inserted the phrase about this to help the reader. This does not solve the problem because the question will then be what the apostle meant with the pronoun this used in the NIV. Anyway, there are two possible things about which the apostle could have meant that a person would be contentious. It could refer to the apostle’s statement in verse 15 that a woman’s hair was given to her as a covering, or it could refer to the entire teaching of the apostle that indicates men should not have a head covering and women also should not if they wear their hair in accordance with how God created them. The interpretation that is supported by the context is that of the teaching of the apostle regarding the entire subject of head covering as implied in what the apostle states next in 1 Corinthians 11:16 we have no other practice—nor do the churches of God. This sentence is emphatic in the Greek because the apostle used an independent personal pronoun in the Greek that is translated “we” in the English that is not needed in the Greek since a Greek verb has an ending that tells whether we have a first, second, or third, person pronoun in the verb. So, when a verb is used with an independent pronoun, the intent of the author is to emphasize what is stated. This implies that the apostle emphasized what he stated in our passage.
Who does the apostle mean when he used the pronoun “we” in the sentence of 1 Corinthians 11:16 we have no other practice—nor do the churches of God? The apostle so far in this first epistle to the Corinthians has used the personal pronoun “we” in three ways. He has used it in such a way that it could refer to believers or all Christians when he conveyed the receiving of the Holy Spirit in 1 Corinthians 2:12:
We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us.
Another usage of the pronoun “we” by apostle is to refer only to the apostles when he addressed sarcastically the Corinthians who think they have arrived spiritually in 1 Corinthians 4:8–9:
8 Already you have all you want! Already you have become rich! You have become kings—and that without us! How I wish that you really had become kings so that we might be kings with you! 9 For it seems to me that God has put us apostles on display at the end of the procession, like men condemned to die in the arena. We have been made a spectacle to the whole universe, to angels as well as to men.
Still another usage of the independent pronoun “we” in the Greek so far in this epistle is for the apostles and all teachers of God’s word as the apostle used it to convey to the Corinthians how fitting it is for such workers to be supported by them as we read in 1 Corinthians 9:11:
If we have sown spiritual seed among you, is it too much if we reap a material harvest from you?
In our passage of 1 Corinthians 11:16, the apostle used it to refer to the apostles as the spiritual leaders of the church of God. We say this because if “we” included every believer then the apostle would not have used the phrase of 1 Corinthians 11:16 the churches of God.
Be that as it may, what the apostle is emphatic about in the sentence of 1 Corinthians 11:16 we have no other practice—nor do the churches of God is described in the phrase other practice that literally reads such (a) custom. The is because of the Greek words used. The word “other” of the NIV is translated from a Greek word (toioutos) that pertains to being like some person or thing mentioned in a context. As an adjective it may mean “such, such as this, this” as Apostle Paul used it to describe his confidence in God through Christ in 2 Corinthians 3:4:
Such confidence as this is ours through Christ before God.
When used as a noun, it may mean “like this” as Apostle Paul used it to describe those who could not enjoy the rule of God because of their lifestyle as stated in Galatians 5:21:
and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.
In our passage of 1 Corinthians 11:16, the word is used as an adjective and so means “such” to describe what the apostle indicated the apostles do not have.
The thing the apostles do not have is described with the word practice in the NIV of the sentence of 1 Corinthians 11:16 we have no other practice—nor do the churches of God. The word “practice” is translated from a Greek word(synētheia) that refers to an accepted or habitual practice of long standing, that is, “custom, practice.” It is used either subjectively or objectively. Subjectively it means “being or becoming accustomed” as Apostle Paul used it to describe those that were subject to idolatry as we read in 1 Corinthians 8:7:
But not everyone knows this. Some people are still so accustomed to idols that when they eat such food they think of it as having been sacrificed to an idol, and since their conscience is weak, it is defiled.
Objectively it means “custom, practice” as it is used for the established norm of the Roman governor in Judea to release a criminal to the Jews during their Passover celebration as we read in John 18:39:
But it is your custom for me to release to you one prisoner at the time of the Passover. Do you want me to release ‘the king of the Jews’?”
It is used objectively in our passage of 1 Corinthians 11:16 with the meaning “custom,” that is, an accepted or habitual practice of long standing.
What is this custom that the apostle had in mind? It is the practice of head covering in worship situation. We have already noted that the Romans practiced the use of head covering with men and women when they offered their sacrifices. Thus, the custom the apostle had in mind was that of using of head covering in worship. He indicated that the apostles did not follow such custom and so it is not to be followed by believers in Christ although some take the apostle to mean the opposite, that is, for women to be veiled.
To convey that the practice of head covering is not required of the believers, Apostle Paul adds a verbal phrase that makes us understand that believers are not required to follow the custom of head covering in worship. It is the verbal phrase of 1 Corinthians 11:16 nor do the churches of God. The word “churches” is translated from a Greek word (ekklēsia) that we have considered in detail in a past study, but I will review briefly what I said previously here, not only for the benefit of those who were not there when we examined the word in detail, but also as a refresher to those who were in that study. The word may refer to a group of citizens assembled for socio-political activities and so means “assembly, gathering” as in the riotous group that rose against Apostle Paul at Athens, as recorded in Acts 19:32:
The assembly was in confusion: Some were shouting one thing, some another. Most of the people did not even know why they were there.
Here the Greek word is translated “assembly.” The Greek word may be used to describe people with shared belief, hence means “community, congregation.” It is in this sense that the word is used to describe Israel in the desert in Acts 7:38:
He was in the assembly in the desert, with the angel who spoke to him on Mount Sinai, and with our fathers; and he received living words to pass on to us.
Most of our English versions used the meaning “congregation” instead of the word “assembly” to translate the Greek word in this passage of Acts although the Authorized Version used the word “church,” but the NKJV used the word “congregation.” In our passage of 1 Corinthians 11:16, it is used in the sense of the universal church of Christ that is made up of various local churches of Christ that meet in different geographical locations. In any event, we close with a reminder of the message of this section that we have considered which is that Men should not have their head covered during prayer and likewise women who wear their hair the way God has given it to them, but they should cover it if they either cut or shave it.
12/24//21