1 Corinthians 11:5

But every woman praying or prophesying with her head unveiled dishonoreth her head; for it is one and the same thing as if she were shaven.

'praying or prophesying' -the hot question is "where"? If we say "in the assembly", then doesn't this contradict Paul's command of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35?

Points to Note:

1. 'Some suggest that Paul passes over the problem of women speaking in the public assembly until 1 Corinthians 1:34; in this section, he is concerned with the impropriety of them removing their veils in worship. Probably some women in Corinth were urging that if the Spirit moved them to speak they must speak and how could they speak with their faces veiled....Others dismiss this view by saying that Paul could have handled both problems at once..' (Wills p. 365)

Observation: The above grounds stated that some use to dismiss this view don't square with how Paul argued in other parts of this letter. For example: In dealing with their eating in the temples of idols, Paul first considers the impact of such activity on the souls of the weak (1 Corinthians 8:10) and then in (1 Corinthians 10:14-22) he will forbid it. Concerning this issue, Paul didn't handle both problems at once.

2. Lenski offers. good comment when he says, 'It is quite essential to note that no modifier is attached to the participles to denote. place where these activities were exercised. So we on our part should not introduce one...By omitting reference to. place Paul says this: "Wherever and whenever it is proper and right for. man or for. woman to pray or to prophesy, the difference between sex should be marked..' (p. 436)

3. McGuiggan breaks down these verses well when he says, 'The female is not to act so as to deny the place God has given her. She can do this by: A. Rejecting attire that is an essential article to female attire (5,13). B. Taking the lead in mixed assemblies gathered for corporate worship. (1 Corinthians 14:34)' (pp. 147-148)

4. Others contend that the women in chapter 11 were praying and prophesying in public groups smaller than or other than the congregational assembly on the first day of the week.

Note: Women did have the gift of prophecy in the N.T. Church. (Acts 2:17; Acts 21:9) And scriptural opportunities for it's use were present. (Titus 2:3)

'dishonoreth her head'. does 'her head', mean 'herself' or does the phrase mean-- by casting off this recognized sign of femininity and subjection, she is showing disrespect to men, the "head' mentioned previously (1 Corinthians 11:3) (or her husband). Again, both would be true.

'for it is one and the same thing' -'she is no better than' (Knox); 'for that is to make herself like one of the shameless women..'(TCNT)

'if she were shaven' -'who has her head shaved' (Knox). 'to be shaven, does not refer to merely cutting one's hair but to shaving one's head.' (Willis p. 366) 'To have the hair cut close, or to be entirely shaved as with. razor.' (Vincent p. 247)

Points to Note:

1. 'It was commonly suggested that short hair or. shaved head was the mark of the Corinthian prostitutes..But there is no contemporary evidence to support this view..' (Fee p. 511)

2. Lenski adds, 'As far as prostitutes are concerned, all the evidence that has been discovered proves that only. few of the very lowest type had shorn or shaven heads. As. class these women endeavored to make themselves as attractive as possible and did their utmost to beautify also their hair.' (p. 439)

3. Willis puts it in good perspective when he adds, 'Women with shaven heads were held in greater contempt...though the precise type of degradation conveyed by shaving one's head is ambiguous (various commentators say that it denoted mourning, slavery, immorality, or mannishness), the obvious meaning in this text is that shorn hair was disgraceful in Corinthian society...The second point to be observed is that to be unveiled in Corinth conveyed about the same meaning in that society as having. shaved head...The veil in all eastern countries was, and to. great extent still is, the symbol of modesty and subjection...Paul is not formulating. rule that. woman, when praying or prophesying, must cover her head. His point is that. woman, WHO ORDINARILY HAS HER HEAD COVERED WHEN APPEARING IN PUBLIC, must also have it covered when she prays or prophesies..Hence, Paul was not formulating. divine law to be observed under special circumstances; instead, he was commanding Christians to recognize the social customs of their day and not to obnoxiously violate these customs..'(pp. 367-368)

Paul's argument is that since. woman is going to cast off one "sign" of her femininity and subjection, then, why not really demonstrate independence from her husband (or men in general) and discard another "sign", i.e. her long hair--for that was sometimes done by women who disregarded the sacredness of marriage. (And still is.)

McGarvey makes. good comment when he says, 'Paul, therefore, demands that those who voluntarily seek. low level, consent to wear all the signs and badges of that level..' (p. 111)