“But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.”
King James Version (KJV)
stephen ojok's comment on 2014-09-01 11:43:28:
There 's something to consider in paul 's saying,as people of God we all know how women who are in the house of God ought to adorn themselves potraying man as men potrays God paul clearly stated that women has to cover because of the angels. So what would it potrays then if she is shorn? Paul was not utterly saying that a woman should shave.even naturally, its only for some circumstances that a woman shaves
T. Milton Brown's comment on 2014-06-01 11:34:35:
I must say that each of those that wrote a comment, created more confusion than clarification! Each one needs to edit themselves and re word their comments in order to clarify what they are attempting to clarify.
Mike Irby's comment on 2014-02-09 15:24:30:
I believe Paul is saying If it causes you to stumble wearing or not wearing we have no such practice It is not a law It is also worth noting that Paul said if it is ok for a woman to have shorn hair or a shaved head then this obviously would not apply Consider scripture verses that teache men not to trim their beards or shave their heads Thirdly those who would contend women should wear head coverings should also contend that Jesus did not have long hair though Jesus is commonly portrayed that way in our culture In this passage Paul says it dishonors a man to have long hair This is ammo for the contentious Lastly This passage dispels another false teaching Many teach women should not prophesy in church They are mistaken according to this passage were they are only encouraged to cover their head while prophesying or praying
Harry johnson's comment on 2014-02-01 20:27:18:
Apostle Paul wouldn't have said a woman's long hair is her glory and for a covering,why would he go against his teaching, He is not that kind of a man.
Ken Bergstrom's comment on 2013-09-10 12:47:49:
One should not explain away the passage of 1 Cor. 11, but explain what Paul is trying to teach. This passage is not difficult to understand, people just explain it away so they don't have to live under its teaching.
ben weaver's comment on 2011-12-10 16:20:34:
I feel called to oppose the often traditional teaching of this passage. My interpretation is based on this epistle rather than a study of historical culture. In the early part of this letter, Paul says he has determined to know nothing save Jesus Christ and Him crucified. He seems to refute worldly wisdom and THINGS that cause divisions. Then, beginning at ch.7:1, he yields to their more worldly questions and explains both sides of various issues, dividing them with words like "nevertheless" which we find in our v.11. Being "IN THE LORD" is a life connection with our God that other religious cultures (like Muslims & Jews) do not have, therefore it is proper for them to practice the principles described in our vs.3 thru 9. With this view, we do not need to wrest vs. 11 & 16. Also, the word "HEAD" is defined as source in vs. 8&9. Lets keep our focus on Jesus Christ and Him crucified rather than religious symbols that relate to those who are not "IN THE LORD".
ben weaver's comment on 2011-01-01 18:20:43:
The earlier writings state "We have no such custom". The churches of God did not hold to such an established practice as was just defined as being for those of the first creation (vs.8 &9). For women who are "IN THR LORD",(V.11) as with men the life connection with God is now through Jesus, not Adam and Eve. Maybe non-Christian religions should wear a symbol of a sin barrier between the creator and fallen humanity.
Ben Weaver's comment on 2010-12-10 15:32:27:
The Gr. word for custom is "Sunetheia" and its definition is "An established custom or practice". Contention does not fit this definition. The K.J.V. and other early translations agree with the Gr. in having Paul write "We have no such custom" whereas modern renderings reverse this message to say "We have no custom other than this". When we take "head" of v. 3 to mean superior or chief, instead of source in the order of creation, as described in vs. 7-9, we create a problem. Verse 10 is also frequently twisted to say the opposite of what Paul wrote. Why don't we do word studies instead of defending traditional interpretations? Jesus told the well-meaning Pharisees, "You have made the word of God of none effect through your tradition. May our Lord direct and bless.