Skip to content
HeadCoverings.org

These charts were created by Pat Donahue and are available as a Microsoft® Word™ document at his website.

Chart Listing - Covering - Custom

Affirmative


  1. Headship
  2. Shame Like Shorn Or Shaven
  3. Image And Glory
  4. Order Of Creation
  5. Freed-Hardeman Forum 1990 – Argument Against Women Preachers - Tied To Creation
  6. Order Of Creation – Alan Highers
  7. Order Of Creation – Ben Vick
  8. Order Of Creation – Ted Clarke
  9. Order Of Creation – Bobby Graham
  10. Order Of Creation – Two Baptists
  11. Freed-Hardeman Forum 1990 – Argument For Women Preachers - The Culture Argument
  12. Freed-Hardeman Forum 1990 – Argument For Women Preachers - Tied To The Covering 1
  13. Freed-Hardeman Forum 1990 – Argument For Women Preachers - Tied To The Covering 2
  14. Freed-Hardeman Forum 1990 – Argument Against Women Preachers - Means What It Says
  15. A Christian On I Corinthians 14:34-35
  16. Because Of The Angels
  17. Artificial Covering Needed By Same Gender As Natural Covering
  18. No Such Custom
  19. Summary Of God's Reasons For The Covering
  20. All Of God's Reasons For The Covering Must Be Shown To Be Temporary
  21. Prayeth Or Prophesieth
  22. Godet's Conclusion

Negative


  1. I Corinthians 11:13 Judge In Yourselves
  2. I Corinthians 11:13 Comely
  3. I Corinthians 11:14 Nature
  4. I Corinthians 11:14 Only A Shame, Not A Sin ?
  5. I Corinthians 11:16 Paul Said It Was A Custom ?
  6. I Corinthians 11:16 "Custom" Means Allowed, Therefore It Can't Refer To The Sin Of The Contentious Man ?
  7. Scholars Say Custom ? (recent)
  8. Scholars Say Custom ? (in antiquity)
  9. Covering Like Kiss and Foot Washing ?
  10. Holy Kiss And Feet Washing - Consistency
  11. Must Hang Down ?
  12. Must Cover the Face ?
  13. Spiritual Gifts Only ?
  14. If Covering Cultural, What About - Women Preachers?, The Lord's Supper Elements?, Immersion For Baptism?
  15. Covering Can't Be Binding Since It Doesn't Go Back All The Way To The Beginning ?
  16. The Figurative Covering Position


Headship

I Corinthians 11:3-5a teaches that a woman ought to be covered when she prays or prophesies because of the order of HEADSHIP:

But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head …

Is man still the head of woman?

Many of our more liberal brethren say no, male headship was just “cultural” (sound familiar?), so they allow women preachers, elders.

Since man is still the head of woman, and since the covering requirement is based upon the headship principle, then the Bible still says that if a woman prays to God uncovered, she dishonors her head (man).

You can’t just pick and choose what you want !

– you can’t have headship without the covering –

Back to top

Shame Like Shorn Or Shaven

I Corinthians 11:5b-6 teaches that a woman ought to be covered, because to be uncovered is shameful like being shorn or shaven:

… for that is even all one as if she were shaven. For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.

I ask my opponent, is it still a shame for a woman to be shaven? Then the Bible still teaches it is likewise a shame for a woman to be uncovered when she prays or prophesies.

Actually the verse uses “if” in the sense of “since” (like in Colossians 3:1). Since it is a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. It is not left up to the reader.

A woman should be covered even Today !

Back to top

Image And Glory

I Corinthians 11:7 teaches that a man should not wear the covering because he is the IMAGE AND GLORY of God, while the woman is the glory of the man:

For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.

I ask my opponent, has anything changed about this reason for the covering?

Does God still recognize this fact of creation when assigning man and woman their roles?

Then the covering still applies Today !

Back to top

Order Of Creation

I Corinthians 11:8-9 teaches that a woman ought to wear the covering because of the ORDER OF CREATION:

. the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.

Likewise, I Timothy 2:11-13 teaches that a woman should not be a “pulpit preacher” because of the ORDER OF CREATION.

Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

Since it is the same argument for both practices, if one practice does not apply anymore, then neither does the other.

Consistency would demand that my

Opponent Accept Women Preachers

Back to top

Freed-Hardeman Forum 1990 - Argument Against Women Preachers

Tied To Creation

First, the woman preacher advocates argued the prohibition against woman preachers was only because of the culture of that time.

Notice Ralph Gilmore’s response:


  • These scriptures are not tied to culture. They are tied to creation … I do not know how they can say … this is a cultural matter when at least these two instances, and probably three instances [i.e., I Cor 11, I Tim 2, and I Cor 14], it’s tied to creation, it’s tied to creation, it’s tied to creation.–p.57
  • I Timothy 2:12-15 is not cultural because it says the woman came from the man, and woman was deceived in the transgression. - p.72

Lynn Mitchell’s Reply: In I Cor 11, Paul bases his discussion on whether women should wear veils on the doctrine of creation & the order that exists between God and woman.-p.133

Doesn’t Lynn Mitchell have a valid point ?

Back to top

Order Of Creation - Alan Highers

against “women preachers” - The Spiritual Sword – January 1996:


With reference to I Timothy 2:11, 12, the most common approach is to contend that Paul was dealing with a situation that was unique to his culture, and that the principles do not apply to the culture in which we live now. Paul himself anchored his teaching, however, to creation, not culture (I Tim. 2:13, 14). He placed his instruction regarding the role of women in a context that makes it impossible for modern feminists to establish that it was merely cultural.

Order of Creation - I Corinthians 11:8-9:


. the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.

Back to top

Order Of Creation - Ben Vick

against “women preachers” - The Informer – January 20, 2003:


Brethren, how can those who claim to be Bible believers and followers of Christ put a woman in a position of authority, teaching over men? No godly woman would put herself in a position such as that! Paul clearly said, “Let the women learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve.” … A woman, any woman, is not to teach over a man, nor is she to dominate him. The passage is as relevant in the 21st century as it was in the 1st century, notwithstanding the changes in culture, country and time. Paul showed that a woman is not to teach over a man based on the order of creation…. If the inspired Paul could transcend culture, country and time in giving reasons why a woman is not to teach or usurp authority over man, then, culture, country and time cannot delete the divine dictate that a woman cannot teach, nor have dominion over a man!

Covering – Order of Creation- I Corinthians 11:8-9:


. the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.

Back to top

Order Of Creation - Ted Clarke

against “women preachers” - Fulton County Gospel News – Nov ‘97


The first reason given for the restrictions on women is the order of creation, “For Adam was formed first, then Eve” (2:13, NKJV). This certainly cannot be said to deal with just a local, temporary cultural situation or with a grumpy old man. This goes all the way back to the sixth day of creation and makes a fundamental argument for the headship of man over the woman – “Adam was formed first, then Eve” (cf. I Corinthians 11:8-9). This explains a basic concept of God’s intended relationship between man and woman.

Order of Creation - I Corinthians 11:8-9:

For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.

Back to top

Order Of Creation - Bobby Graham

against “women preachers” - Biblical Insights – November 2002:


Some have … referred to Biblical restrictions on the role of women as merely cultural, reflecting the biases of the society of that ancient day. The truth stands out as quite different. Every passage dealing with such restrictions has within it the reasons for the restrictions, and they never were cultural. In I Corinthians 11 and 14, the apostle Paul very carefully showed that the reasons behind the limitations were related to the creation and to divine law. Likewise in I Tim 2, some of the same reasons were given for the restrictions imposed ….

Order of Creation - I Corinthians 11:8-9:

For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.

Back to top

Order Of Creation - Two Baptists

Barry Presley (Baptist Army Chaplain) 10-16-00:


I Cor 14:34-35 – Is this a blanket prohibition from God, or Paul’s advice to a particular city which has problems with ‘temple prostitutes’? … What about chapter 11 injunctions about covered heads and short hair?

Carolyn Dickens, chair-woman of the Raleigh, NC First Baptist Church’s board of deacons - Huntsville Times, 9-26-98


That passage (Eph 5:22-23) is meant to be understood in the context in which it was written: 1st-century Christianity

Culture has no more to do with I Corinthians 11:2-16 than it has do to with I Corinthians 14:34-35 or Ephesians 5:22-23.

Back to top

A Christian On I Corinthians 14:34-35

The “command” might not apply today at all …. It is my opinion that they objected because it was the custom of the day for women to remain silent in public assemblies, and let their husbands speak for them; and they were offended that some of the Corinthian women were violating this custom. (I interpret the issue of married women wearing a head covering in the same light.) Rather than allow the issue to cause disruption within the church, Paul upheld the social custom of the day

It is perfectly proper for churches to expect their members to adhere to societal norms and customs (as long as they are not in conflict with God’s will, of course), and I think that is exactly the point that Paul was making when he wrote that women should remain silent in the assembly, and when he wrote that married women should wear a covering for their heads to show their subjection to their husbands.

… the churches need to reconsider whether or not the command for women to keep silent in the assembly is still applicable, now that the social conventions regarding the proper conduct of women in public have changed.

Greg Casteel 2-29-96

Back to top

Because Of The Angels

I Corinthians 11:10 teaches that a woman ought to wear the covering BECAUSE OF THE ANGELS:

For this cause ought the woman to have power (a sign of authority, ASV) on her head because of the angels.

I ask my opponent, has anything changed about this reason for the covering? Nobody even knows for sure exactly what this means, so how could anybody know that the reason/rule doesn’t apply anymore?

The covering still applies Today -

Because of the Angels !

Back to top

Artificial Covering Needed By Same Gender

As Natural Covering

I Cor 11:13-15 teaches a woman ought to wear the artificial covering because she is the one given the natural covering of long hair:

Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered? Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.

Paul’s argument is essentially this:


God has given women (not men) long hair as a natural/permanent covering; that ought to tell us that when it comes to the artificial/ temporary covering, God wants the woman covered, not the man.

Are women still supposed to have longer hair than men today ?

Then the veil is still required today !

Back to top

No Such Custom

I Corinthians 11:16:

But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.

So I Corinthians 11:16 teaches that the practice of wearing the covering was uniform throughout all the churches everywhere, and was not just a local custom. Compare to:


  • I Corinthians 4:17 as I teach every where in every church
  • I Corinthians 7:17 And so ordain I in all churches
  • I Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints

I Corinthians 11:2-16 was written “unto the church of God which is at Corinth … with all that in every place upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord .” (1:2) ALL CHRISTIANS !

Back to top

Summary Of God’s Reasons For The Covering

3-5a headship (man over woman)

is man still the head of woman?

5b-6 shame like shorn or shaven head

is it still a shame for a woman to be shaven?

7 man the image and glory of God; woman the glory of man

has this fact changed?

8-9 order and purpose of creation

has the order and purpose of creation changed?

10 because of the angels

does this still apply?

13-15 nature’s teaching about the hair

in general do women still have longer hair than men?

16 apostles and churches had no practice different than the covering

My opponent must prove ALL of these rea