In the first letter we have that Paul sent to the Corinthians, he wrote to address some specific things. Firstly, there were serious issues in this church. They were divided, arguing, and following different human teachers. They also had a big issue with tolerating sin, even priding themselves on how forbearing they were toward a man in their congregation living and sleeping with his stepmother. Paul had to set them right, and he did so by comparing them to ancient Israel and explaining how the Passover and Festival of Unleavened Bread apply to the New Covenant church.
In the midst of all this, Paul also talked about proper conduct within a church community. One of those passages is labeled in the chapter and verse model of our modern Bibles as 1 Corinthians 11:1-16. It’s a passage most people skip over because it has to do with headcoverings and hair length for men and women. It’s the only place in the New Testament where this topic comes up, and it’s one that generates a lot of debate, offense, and division so we tend to ignore it completely. But we miss something important if we skip this passage, even if we don’t agree on how to interpret it.
The Headcovering Passage
People often approach this passage as just being about women’s headcoverings, but it’s addressed just as much to men. Paul opened this discussion by saying, “Be imitators of me, just as I also am of Christ” and praising the Corinthians for maintaining “the traditions just as I passed them on to you” (1 Cor. 11:1, 2, NET). He then made a statement about authority in the churches (the ecclesia, or called-out ones) of God.
But I want you to know that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ. Any man who prays or prophesies with his head covered disgraces his head. But any woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered disgraces her head, for it is one and the same thing as having a shaved head.
1 Corinthians 11:3-5, NET
In my studies on this topic, I learned that culturally, Jewish men and women covered their heads with scarves or prayer shawls while Greek/Gentile men and women tended not to cover (though they could, mostly as a fashion choice). This passage would have involved a change for Jewish men as well as Gentile women. Men who covered their heads while praying needed to stop, and women who didn’t cover their heads while praying needed to start. Full disclosure, I do cover my head when at a church gathering or praying and studying at home. You can click here to learn more about why and the research I did into the topic.

Context For Paul’s Next Commands About Women
So why can’t we just skip over this divisive passage? For one thing, it’s part of the Bible and if we admit the Bible is the inspired word of God, then there is value in every part of it even if we’re not yet sure what to make of it. This is a significant reason to pay attention to 1 Corinthians 11:1-16, but it’s not the one that we’re going to focus on today. In this post, I want to focus on the important context clues this passage provides for interpreting other parts of the letter.
As the letter continued, Paul covered instructions for keeping Passover correctly (1 Cor. 11:17-34), spiritual gifts and unity in the body (1 Cor. 12), the “more excellent way” of agape love (1 Cor. 13), the use of prophecy or “inspired speaking” in the church (1 Cor. 14:1-25), and proper, orderly conduct during a church meeting (1 Cor. 14:26-40). Paul didn’t address the topic of women again directly until chapter 14, but since he started out this part of the letter by addressing how men and women properly pray and prophecy in the church (men with their heads uncovered, women with their heads covered), we can assume the discussions about keeping Passover, having spiritual gifts and using them properly, and love are addressed equally to men and women in the church. The NET even uses the phrase “brothers and sisters” when Paul addresses believers, because the whole church group is included when Paul uses the word “brethren” (adelphoi in Greek). We all have key roles to play, and very similar responsibilities and gifts.
Then, we come to a place where Paul again addressed women and men separately, with different instructions for each. It’s one of the infamous passages about women being silent in church.
What should you do then, brothers and sisters? When you come together, each one has a song, has a lesson, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation. Let all these things be done for the strengthening of the church. … Two or three prophets should speak and the others should evaluate what is said. … For you can all prophesy one after another, so all can learn and be encouraged. Indeed, the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets, for God is not characterized by disorder but by peace.
As in all the churches of the saints, the women should be silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak. Rather, let them be in submission, as in fact the law says. If they want to find out about something, they should ask their husbands at home, because it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in church.
1 Corinthians 14:26, 29, 31-35, NET
If you read Paul’s statement about women being silent by itself, it sounds like women shouldn’t say a word the whole time they’re at a gathering of believers. This doesn’t make sense in the context of other scriptures, which show women were deeply involved in the churches. This is where 1 Corinthians 11 can provide much-needed context to help us figure out what Paul is likely saying in this passage.
“In light of 11:2-16, which gives permission for women to pray or prophesy in the church meetings, the silence commanded here seems not to involve the absolute prohibition of a woman addressing the assembly. Therefore (1) some take be silent to mean not taking an authoritative teaching role as 1 Tim 2 indicates, but (2) the better suggestion is to relate it to the preceding regulations about evaluating the prophets (v. 29). Here Paul would be indicating that the women should not speak up during such an evaluation, since such questioning would be in violation of the submission to male leadership that the OT calls for (the law, e.g., Gen 2:18).”
NET study note on 1 Cor. 14:34
Whether you think women should cover their heads today or not, the fact is that 1 Corinthians 11 addresses the proper way for women to pray and/or prophecy. Obviously women can, and frequently do throughout the scriptures, pray and prophecy outside of church meetings. But the context of this section of scripture is how to do things in the churches, when believers are gathered together, as for a formal church service. It follows, then, that Paul talks about how women can properly pray and prophecy in church in 1 Corinthians 11, then addresses a time when silence is more appropriate in 1 Corinthians 14.
Culture Adds More Context

It also helps to take the cultural context into account when looking at Paul’s writings. Now, there are right and wrong ways to do this. Sometimes, people say that Paul just had a backwards view of women because he was influenced by his culture and so we don’t need to listen to him anymore. But in reality, some of his writings indicate he was pretty radical compared to the culture of his day.
Likewise the women are to dress in suitable apparel, with modesty and self-control. Their adornment must not be with braided hair and gold or pearls or expensive clothing, but with good deeds, as is proper for women who profess reverence for God. A woman must learn quietly with all submissiveness. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man. She must remain quiet.
1 Timothy 2:9-12, NET
We read this today and we might feel offended that he’d say women have to be quiet and submissive and can’t teach. People of Paul’s day, though, would have read “a woman must learn” and been shocked by that. This statement “was a radical and liberating departure from the Jewish view that women were not to learn the law” (NET footnote on 1 Tim. 2:12). Some Jewish girls received Torah instruction while they were young and if they had a good family they might have learned a little more, but women weren’t generally taught very much and they certainly weren’t selected for advanced study with respected rabbis.
Jesus’s interactions with women as spiritual equals was unusual, and Paul continued His practice. He also assured his readers, though, that women serving in the church, preaching the gospel, and learning God’s words did not mean that women were suddenly going to start taking over roles that God entrusted to men. Women are to learn, yes, but they will also be submissive in the sense that God expects. Women can pray and prophecy, but they won’t (or shouldn’t) be disrupting church meetings or usurping male roles.
We often miss it today with our modern perspectives, but Paul isn’t advocating for either the subjugation of women or for doing away with gender roles in 1 Corinthians and 1 Timothy. It’s actually a more balanced view than we often find in churches today, which in many cases either try to follow society in doing away with different roles for men and women entirely, or follow traditional (mis)interpretations of Paul that bar women from being involved. However you interpret the passage on hair length and headcoverings, it provides much-needed context assuring us that women were deeply involved in the New Testament church and they still can be in the churches today.
Featured image by StockSnap from Pixabay
Song Recommendation: “This Girl” by Lauren Daigle


Why does the Gospels amount to a false messiah foreign Roman counterfeit on par with the Czar’s Protocols of the Elders of Zion?
Fundamental error in quoting opinions made by “Big Authorities”, cult of personalities, similar to placing an idol upon a pedestal, with absolutely no knowledge of משנה תורה common law. Simple question never asked? How does the mitzva of Moshiach qualify as a Torah commandment? Reliance solely upon NaCH sources of kabbalah fails to grasp the mitzva of Moshiach as a Written Torah time oriented tohor commandment which weighs upon the scales of Life or Death.
The mitzva of Moshiach, an Oral Torah time oriented commandment, only secondarily limited to time – like looking at ones’ watch! What type of commandment qualifies as a Life/Death-time oriented commandment? Korbanot require swearing a Torah oath, and life & death! Aaron and his House “anointed” to dedicate “Moshiach” korbanot! Hence the Moshiach of the House of Aaron serves as the Torah foundation for the mitzva of Moshiach for the House of David as taught by NaCH kabbalah. Impossible to learn Torah common law without the wisdom of learning by means of comparative, similar mitzvot precedents! Torah common law/משנה תורה\ stands upon the יסוד/foundation\ of positive & negative toldot Torah commandments which function as logical פרדס precedents to Av tohor time oriented commandments.
Meaning, Common Law precedents based upon positive and negative ((think Gemarah halachot as precedents to re-interpret the k’vanna of the language of the Mishna)) commandments. Impossible to understand tohor time oriented commandments ignorant – also – of the role of tohor middot!!!! Time oriented commandments require the dedication of defined & specific tohor middot, just as does the dedication of korbonot by the Moshiach House of Aaron. The wisdom which discerns the middah of אל from the middah of רחום from the middah of חנון etc. What middah tohor does the mitzva of Moshiach dedicate holy to the G-d of the 1st Sinai Commandment? An absolutely critical and crucial question. This most essential question concerning the Torah mitzva of Moshiach, the church has never asked in its entire history as a religious faith belief in its Trinity god(s)!
In point of fact, the church fathers deny the existence of the Oral Torah. Despite the fact that the mitzvah of Moshiach qualifies as an Av tohor time oriented commandment, which sanctifies the middah of justice, holy to HaShem, as THE sanctification of the mitzva of Moshiach. Based upon the Oral Torah revelation to Moshe at Horev. Despite, justice not included in the 13 tohor middot, the mitva דאורייתא of Moshiach dedicates the pursuit of judicial justice among our people inside the oath sworn lands, as the midda korban dedication holy לשמה. The fact that the mitzva of Moshiach the Torah of דברים defines through the middah of צדק צדק תרדוף, as the k’vanna of the mitzva of Moshiach in all generations of the chosen Cohen nation. We Jews do not wait for the coming of the Moshiach, any more than We Jews wait for some stranger ICC Court of the Hague to establish just rule of judicial justice in the land of Israel! Post Shoah, Europe has forever lost any mandate to judge the Jewish people; as likewise the dead Olympus Gods of the Xtian post Shoah fictional mythology.
Brit – as an oath alliance, does not mean covenant. A bad translation. Just that simple. Tefillah does not mean prayer. A bad translation. Just that simple. Tefillah unlike saying Tehillem entails swearing a Torah oath. Just that simple. Impossible to swear a Torah oath without שם ומלכות. The concept of שם breathes the spirit of life through the Yatzir Ha’Tov. This Spirit Name raises the souls of the Avot from the dead within the chosen Cohen nation’s Yatzir Ha’Tov. The concept of מלכות has the k’vanna of dedication of some defined tohor middah. This tohor time oriented commandment which requires a שם ומלכות Torah oath, impossible to grasp without the Oral Torah logic system known as פרדס. The 4 part פרדס does neither resembles nor compares to the 3 part syllogism of Aristotle’s logic, nor to Hegal’s system of dialectic metaphysics of greater and lesser logic. Translating abstract Hebrew words to other languages amounts to false translations. Just that simple.
The Name שם, directly refers to the revelation of the Divine Presence Spirit revealed in the revelation of the 1st Sinai commandment. Any attempt to “convert” this Spirit Name to words: such as – YHVH, Jehova, Jesus, Allah etc amounts to the sin of the Golden Calf – wherein Israel 40 days after the revelation of the Spirit Divine Presence Name, many of Israel translated the revealed Spirit Name to a false translation word אלהים! The Torah revelation at Sinai exposes the tumah of any and all attempts to translate the Spirit Name revealed in the 1st Sinai commandment, ((which the Xtian bibles and Muslim korans exclude this 1st Commandment Spirit Name revelation)), as the “Sin of the Golden Calf”. Just that simple. Righteousness does not come by way of Av tumah avoda zarah. Just that simple.
T’shuva does not mean repentance. A bad translation. Just that simple. T’shuva has everything to do with the struggle, think of Esau and Yaacov in the womb of Rivka, between the two opposing Yatzirot within the bnai brit chosen Cohen peoples’ hearts. Hence the Torah incorrectly spelled heart as לבב rather than לב. Rabbi Yechuda Ha’Nasi, explained in the Mishna of ברכות the additional ב, as a reference to the two opposing and conflicting Yatzirot within the heart.
This, the author of the Mishna, the foundation to study the Oral Torah revelation of the 13 tohor middot revealed to Moshe, 40 days after the sin of the Golden Calf, on Yom Kippur. Yom Kippur where HaShem did t’shuva and annulled the vow to make Moshe the chosen Cohen nation rather than the seed of Avraham Yitzak and Yaacov! T’shuva as a Torah mitzva, learns from the precedents of a father who annuls the vow made by his young daughter, or the Husband who annuls the vow made by his wife. Both of these Torah precedents serve to define the mussar of T’shuva! Repentance has no portion, it plays no part in annulling a vow. Just that simple. The translation of t’shuva to repentance a false translation. Just that simple.
Peace a false translation of Shalom. The latter a verb which stands upon the foundation of trust. The former evil translation a noun that amounts to pie in the sky false rhetoric. Like the “peace negotiations” between Arabs and Jews. Post Oct 7th Jews do not trust Arabs of Gaza. Shalom learns from the Torah mitzva of Shabbat. This precedent mitzva of shabbat, the Talmud builds around the 3 meals. A person does not invite an enemy into his home to sit and meal together – ever. No trust No shalom. Just that simple. The false & sophomoric translation of the substitute word “peace”, just that simple – utterly false.
The term יראת שמים, commonly mistranslated as: Fear of Heaven – another false translation. A טיפש פשט literal translation on par with the fundamentalist belief that the Genesis creation story literally refers to the creation of the Universe in 6 days! Bible toting Xtian fundamentalists absolutely abhor Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution. In 1925 the Monkey Trial between John T. Scopes teaching evolution in a state-funded school! Comparable to the dispute between Galileo vs. the Poop. יראת שמים, a metaphor which refers to protecting ones’ Good Name reputation. Hence the Hebrew term: Baal Shem Tov/Master of the Good Name. Mistranslating this abstract Hebrew metaphor to “fear of Heaven” as false as the absurd notions of Xtian fundamentalists concerning the Creation story in the opening Aggadic mussar of the first Book of the Torah – which introduces Av tohor time oriented commandments.
Emunah does not correctly translate into “faith”. Emunah learns from the precedents of Moshe standing before the Court of Par’o, on the matter of Par’o, his decree which withheld the straw required to make brick and the consequent beating of Israelite slaves. Another precedent: the rebuke of Yitro when Moshe judged the nation alone by himself. The Torah defines emunah as the righteous pursuit of judicial justice; wherein the Courts make fair restitution of damages inflicted by party A upon party B. The false substitution of faith as personal belief in some theologically decreed Creed concerning the nature of the Gods, such as Islam’s strict Monotheism; this latter perversion of emunah, it defines the Av tumah 2nd Sinai commandment known as avoda zarah: do not worship other Gods.
LikeLike