1. Imitate me, just as I also imitate Christ.
The Corinthians were to imitate Paul in those things wherein he imitated Christ; in matters of
faith, not in matters of personal taste, judgement, or the customs of his home town.
2. Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions as I
delivered them to you. 3. But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head
of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. 4. Every man praying or prophesying, having his
head covered, dishonors his head. 5. But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head
uncovered dishonors her head, for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved.
What Paul has said is that there are different positions in God's scheme of things. God intended
for men and women to hold different positions. Men and women are not identical. They hold
different positions as part of God's plan. Paul later pointed out in verses eleven and twelve that
men and women are mutually dependent on each other, but they are still different. There are
obvious biological differences which are genetic and a result of God's own design. There are also
differences which are a result of the customs of men. In most societies men and women do not
customarily dress and groom exactly alike. Going against these customs is considered shameful.
In our society today one of the customary differences is that it is a shame for a man to wear a
dress, while it is not a shame for a woman to wear one. In Corinth at that time one of the
customary differences between men and women was in their manner of dress and grooming. The
women hid their heads from view, [ver. 6] while the men left theirs exposed. [ver. 7] The word
Paul used to describe what was customarily done to female heads in Corinth is a word that
indicates hiding a thing from view. [ver 6] It is the same word that is used in the Septuagint to
describe what was to be done to the nakedness of the priests by the underclothes they were to
wear. [Ex. 28:38] When people talk about a "something" on the head, they are not saying what
Paul did. Paul said, "head covered", and used a word indicating concealment.
At that time and place it was shameful for a woman to leave her head exposed to view, or to
shave it. [ver. 5,6] Paul compares the two in order to make his point about concealing the female
head clear. When they admitted that shaving the female head was a shame they were admitting
that going against customary practices is a shame. When they admitted that, they were agreeing
with the point Paul was making, that it was not proper for them to ignore their custom of
covering the female head.
In Discussing this topic Paul uses the words, "dishonor", [ver. 4,5] "shameful", [ver. 6] "proper",
[ver 13] and "glory" [ver. 15]. He does not use the word "sin". He is discussing the Christian's
responsibility to customary propriety.
6. For if a woman is not covered, let her also be shorn. But if it is a shame for a woman to be
shorn or shaved, let her be covered.
Notice Paul said, "if" it is a shame, not, "since" it is a shame. Paul is not laying down hard and
fast rules that never change. He is talking about local customs which change frequently, but
which still must be taken into consideration by all who are interested in not being shameful in the
place where they live. Paul does not say it "is" a shame. He says "if" it is a shame. "If" it "is" a
shame, then it is to be avoided. The same view has to be taken of customs of dress and grooming
today. There is always a style that is worn by responsible people, but it is not always the same
style from year to year, and place to place. What is proper and what is not proper in dress and
grooming changes quickly and may only be determined by observing what is customary practice in
a given time or place. God made no laws to dictate specific styles except for the clothes of the
priests of Israel. He made none for our day.
(It should be noted that the head covering Paul is talking about in this passage is not hair. It was
something that could be removed without removing the hair, [ver. 6] since the hair was still there
to be removed by being shorn or shaved after the covering Paul spoke of had already been
removed.)
7. For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but
woman is the glory of man. 8. For man is not from woman, but woman from man. 9. Nor was
man created for the woman, but woman for the man.
Paul again stated that there is a difference in the man and the woman. This time he points out that
man was the original, and the woman was created from him and for him. They are complimentary
to each other in their differences. They are not identical.
10. For this reason the woman ought to have authority on her head, because of the angels.
Paul was talking about position. Angels who left the position in which God placed them are to be
punished. Jude 6 "The angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own habitation,
He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgement of the great day;" Women
who refuse to dress and groom themselves as the respectable women of their time and place
customarily do, have the fate of those angels as an example to warn them away from rebellion
against God's order.
11. Nevertheless, neither is man independent of woman, nor woman independent of man, in the
Lord. 12. For as the woman was from the man, even so also the man also is through the woman;
but all things are from God.
Both man and woman are mutually dependent on each other in the Lord.
13. Judge among yourselves. Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered?
Notice, Paul said, "Judge among yourselves." That's the only way to find out what the proper
style is. There is no other way! Paul didn't say, "Go to the Bible and read what the proper style
is." He said, "Judge among yourselves." There isn't any other way to find out what is the proper
custom of dress and grooming, in a place. "Proper" is from the Greek word "prepo" which means
"To be becoming, or befitting." The only way to judge what is becoming in matters of dress and
grooming is by doing what Paul told the Corinthians to do. Considering what is customarily done
by decent people in the place where we are is the only way to determine what is proper in matters
of dress and grooming.
14. Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him?
"Nature" is another reference to customary practice, not to genetics or biology. Observation of
the customary practice of decent men in a society teaches us how long decent men in that society
should wear their hair in a given time or place. Nothing else can. Paul knew that, and that's why
he gave those instructions, instead of telling them to read it out of the Bible.
15. But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her, for her hair is given to her for a covering.
Any feature that is considered desirable is a glory to the woman who possesses that feature.
Judging from what Paul said long hair on a woman was a feature that was considered desirable, so
it was a glory to those women who had it. At the same time, and in the same place, it was not a
glory for a man. For him it was a dishonor to have long hair. [Paul doesn't say how long because
their observation of local practices would tell them that, so he didn't need to.]
The word "covering" in verse 15 is not from the same Greek word as elsewhere in the passage.
This is from the Greek word "peribolaion". The same word is also used in Heb. 1:12 where it is
translated "cloak" or "vesture". The Greek word means, "something cast around." It doesn't
carry the idea of hiding something from view. It wasn't a substitute for the head covering Paul
referred to earlier. Paul used one word to describe the covered head, and a different word to
describe the hair. Hair decorates the head.
16. But if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor the churches of God.
When a person binds on others customs which he himself does not practice, he will seem to be
contentious. Paul explained that the customs he referred to were not generally recognized
customs. They were customs observed among the Corinthians, so the Corinthians were the ones
obligated to observe them. Christians in other places were not obligated to observe these
Corinthian customs, and according to Paul, Christians in other places, including himself, and his
companions, did not. [ver. 16]
In reviewing what Paul said in 1 Cor. 11:1-16 it is clear he was talking about custom. He said he
was, so there is no doubt he was. That is the word Paul used to refer to his topic in 1 Cor.
11:1-16. In verse sixteen Paul said "custom". He did not say "command". "We have no such
custom, nor do the churches of God." The last custom Paul had discussed was head covering and
hair length. (Verses 13-15) The word translated "custom" in the English is from the Greek word
"sunetheia". The word is also used in John 18:39, "You have a custom, that I should release
someone to you at the Passover." The "sunetheia" means, "a common usage" in New Testament
Greek. What Paul said in 1 Cor. 11:16 is, We, (Paul and his associates) do not have the custom I
am talking to you Corinthians about and neither do the churches of God. One of the objections
raised to that interpretation is based on a false translation of another word which is found in some
versions. The word "such" in verse 16 is falsely translated "other" in some translations. There is
no justification for that. The Greek word is "toioutos" and is used sixty times in the New
Testament. In every case it means "such" not "other". Look at a couple of the other places
where it is used. Matt. 9:8 "Now when the multitudes saw it, they marveled and glorified God,
who had given such power to men." What kind of sense would that verse make if it was
translated, "Who had given "other" power to men." Matt. 19:14 "For of "such" is the kingdom of
heaven." Should it be, "For of "other" is the kingdom of heaven"?? Of course it shouldn't, and it
shouldn't be translated "Other" in 1 Cor. 11:16 either! It should be translated "such". The only
reason anybody has any problem with the correct translation of the word is that it doesn't support
some of their false doctrines if it is translated correctly!
Another objection raised to this passage being a discussion of custom is based on the assumption
that custom cannot be an important enough subject for the Holy Spirit to spend half a chapter
discussing because custom originates with men and changes frequently. That objection simply
ignores or attempts to explain away the fact that Paul very clearly stated that he was discussing
custom. A person cannot read the passage carefully and honestly affirm that Paul was not
discussing custom, since he said he was.
Paul also used the word "nature". 1 Cor. 11:14, "Does not even nature itself teach you that if a
man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him?" That word isn't talking about biology or genetics. It
is talking about what people do. Men don't have short hair because their hair won't grow long.
Men have short hair because they cut their hair. When men don't cut their hair it grows long.
That means Paul was talking about customary voluntary practices when he uses the word
"nature". He is not talking about something that is born in a person and not subject to the human
will. If the Corinthians observed and considered the customary practices of the responsible
people of their society they would learn what was or was not considered shameful by them. That
was the point Paul was making.
So, what does the passage mean to people today? The answer depends on the customs of your
society. If you live in a place where the female head is customarily concealed by those who are
respectable, it means exactly what it did to the Corinthians. If you do not live in such a place, it
means that you must consider the customary practices of the respectable people in your own area
and do like them.
God didn't give enough information for any to be able to reproduce the actual customs of the
Corinthians to whom Paul wrote, because He didn't intend for that to be done. It is intended that
people observe the respectable customs of their own time and place in order to be honorable, as
the Corinthians were to observe theirs in order to be honorable. People are obeying this passage
when they observe the respectable customs of dress and grooming of their own time and place.
When they aren't doing that, they are not obeying this passage.
That seems too simple to some who would like to make this passage the basis for all sorts of ideas
about uniforms of dress and grooming contrary to customary practices of their time and place, but
it is not too simple. It is what the passage teaches.
Any who have an idea that this passage does bind some particular custom on all Christians for all
time on earth are under obligation to define PRECISELY what that custom is. If the Corinthian
custom is to be bound it absolutely must be so defined, since you cannot bind what you cannot
define. Many who teach that this passage binds some article of clothing or style of dress and
grooming on all Christians everywhere have been challenged directly to tell exactly what it is. To
this date none have, not a single one, and none ever will, because there is not enough information
in the passage to do that. If the words in the passage are taken at their literal definition, in order
to define the custom, the female head would have to be hidden from view, as is done in some
eastern countries. Since the head includes the face, the face would also need to be covered, if the
literal statements in the passage are to be followed, because there is not enough information in the
passage to allow less than what is required by the fullest definitions of the words used. This
passage is not binding a single custom of dress and grooming on all Christians. It is binding only
those honorable customs of their own time and place.
THE RESPONSIBILITY OF CHRISTIANS TO THE CUSTOMS OF DRESS AND
GROOMING OF THE SOCIETIES IN WHICH THEY LIVE
The question of the responsibility of Christians to conform to the standards of dress and grooming
set by the societies in which they live is not widely misunderstood by most people, but it is very
persistently misunderstood by a few, and those few are responsible for a lot of false ideas and
confusion about it.
Most of those who are confused about the issue of what to wear, and how to groom, fall into two
categories, those who are unwilling to accept changes in customs of dress and grooming; and
those who are unwilling to acknowledge the implications of failing to conform to the customary
styles of dress and grooming which are characteristic of responsible, decent people in their
society.
The first tries to get all Christians everywhere for all time to dress and groom in some particular
style, usually the one that they themselves are used to. They always have a problem explaining
how the men in the Bible had skirts and the men in most of the world today don't. At one time
pants were obviously underwear, according to God's own dictate. [Ex. 28:42] At that time they
certainly were not modest outer wear. How they got to be acceptable outer wear, as they
obviously are today seems to be a total mystery to this group of people.
The other group is constantly dressing and grooming in ways that make people identify them with
outlaws and misfits, and brings reproach upon the church, and anyone who is identified with them.
What does the Bible say about these things? Does it say anything at all? What is MODEST
apparel? When Solomon looked out his window and saw a woman in the attire of a HARLOT
[Prov. 7:10] what did he see? What did the woman have on? Where does the Bible say what a
harlot wears? How did Solomon know that woman was dressed and groomed like a harlot? Was
he being unfair to the woman. Was he just jumping to unwarranted conclusions, or did he know
what he was talking about? What was modest apparel in Jerusalem in the days of Solomon? Do
you think he knew? If he did know, how did he know? The Bible doesn't tell what it was. How
could he, or anyone else know? May proper dress and grooming be identified, and if so how? Is
it something the Bible tells us? IF IT DOES, WHERE DOES IT?
Do harlots wear the same things and groom the same ways today where you live that they did
when Solomon looked out his window long ago? Can you identify the attire of a harlot in your
city today? I'm sure you can, but the question is, HOW? Do you turn to the Bible or to the
customs of your society to identify the attire of a lewd and ungodly woman? You turn to your
society. There is no place else to go for the information, because that's where the information is.
Another point to remember is that these customs are not national or international, or for a year, or
a decade, or a lifetime. THEY ARE LOCAL, AND NOW!
The same thing is true of modest apparel. Modest apparel here today [no matter where you are]
is not what it was a hundred years ago. But today as then, there are still modest apparel and
apparel which is not modest. Christians are obligated to determine which is which and dress and
groom themselves as the responsible and upright people in their society do. How do I go about
finding out what that is? Just like Paul told the Corinthians to do it, by observing what is done
where I live. 1 Cor. 11:13 JUDGE AMONG YOURSELVES. IS IT PROPER? In the next
verse he says the same thing again using the work "NATURE". When and if men have short hair,
the reason is because they cut it. If they don't cut it, it doesn't stay short, so when Paul said,
"NATURE" he was talking about something which was customarily being done in Corinth at that
time. If the Corinthians observed that to be true, Paul expected them to do the same thing,
because they were part of that society and had to conform to its styles of dress and grooming if
they were going to give the impression of being proper people. Paul hastened to point out to
them that he and other Christians did not have those same customs and therefore were not
obligated to observe them, as the Corinthians were. [1 Cor. 11:16]
What does all that mean to me? It means I must observe the styles of dress and grooming which
are characteristic of the honorable people of the place where I live. It means I must not follow the
styles of dress and grooming which are characteristic of the dishonorable people of my society. In
every society there is always a difference, and Christians must dress and groom to appear
honorable, because Christians are honorable.
What about changes in customs? Customs of dress and grooming change constantly, but there is
still always what is proper, and what is not proper. Christians have to be sure to always stay with
what is proper. That means they are never found dressing and grooming themselves in ways
about which there is reasonable doubt and confusion regarding the implications and impression
given by how they are dressing and grooming. If all honorable people in a certain city wear red
neck ties, all the Christians in that city are obligated to wear red neck ties, so everyone will
recognize that they are honorable people. If in the same city only dishonorable people wear blue
neck ties no Christian could wear a blue neck tie, as long as that was the true fact of the matter,
because Christians are not dishonorable, and are obligated before God to avoid looking like they
are. This is, of course, as true for young Christians as it is for the old. Age is no excuse for
dressing or grooming in such a way as to be identified with those who are dishonorable.
God does not dictate a particular style of dress and grooming. What He does dictate is that the style, whatever it is, must be honorable.