This is a response to many of the False Teachings We have Seen and Heard Concerning Head-Coverings
Copyright © 2016 Torahforwomen.com All rights reserved.
Women Beware!
Over the years, we have observed many false teachings repeated on social media and across the internet. This ebook is a response to these false teachings. We know that there are women wear head-coverings as a personal choice based soley on their fashion taste. This teaching is not addressing your personal fashion, nor are we making legalistic statements of what a woman can or cannot wear. You must make your choices based on your personal study, conviction and beliefs.
However, what we will attempt to correct are the unscriptural teachings we continue to see which tell women they MUST wear a head-covering because it is a biblical commandment which sets them apart. This article is not based on personal opinions, but we will defeat this false teaching with scripture.
However, what we will attempt to correct are the unscriptural teachings we continue to see which tell women they MUST wear a head-covering because it is a biblical commandment which sets them apart. This article is not based on personal opinions, but we will defeat this false teaching with scripture.
False Teachers claim the law commands women to wear a head-covering
When challenged, people who demand a woman must wear a head-covering cannot provide one commandment in the Torah (first five books of the bible), or any other part of the Old Testament (Tanakh), which clearly commands a woman to wear a head-covering.
False Teachers pick one ceremony in the Torah as their proof
that a woman must wear a head-covering
In the book of Numbers, a woman who is accused of adultery by her jealous husband was required to go before Yahweh with her long hair down – Without any head-covering. Let's say that again - she was presented before Yahweh WITHOUT any head-covering.
If Paul taught that a woman must have a cloth head-covering on her head before she can go before Yahweh, why did the Torah require a woman to have her cloth head-covering removed before being presented to Yahweh?
“And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, If any man's wife go aside, and commit a trespass against him, and a man lie with her carnally…Then shall the man bring his wife unto the priest, and he shall bring her offering for her, the tenth part of an ephah of barley meal; he shall pour no oil upon it, nor put frankincense thereon; for it is an offering of jealousy, an offering of memorial, bringing iniquity to remembrance. And the priest shall bring her near, and set her before the LORD…And the priest shall set the woman before the LORD, and uncover the woman's head, and put the offering of memorial in her hands, which is the jealousy offering: and the priest shall have in his hand the bitter water that causeth the curse.“ Numbers 5:11-18
Note that these verses are not stating a commandment for women to wear a head-covering. Yet, since head-covering advocates have no real Torah commandment proving their false teaching, they resort to quoting this scripture and twisting it to fit, or making false presumptions. However, their teaching is actually refuted by this passage of scripture. They say Paul commanded a woman must have a head-covering ON before she goes before YHVH, but this passage in the Torah says her head-covering must be removed. This completely contradicts their claims.
How do the false teachers of the head-coverings movement come to their conclusion of there being a commandment?
Their claim is: because the priest had to remove a head-covering from the woman (Numbers 5), there must be an existing commandment prescribing all women to wear a head-covering. However, let's apply this same illogical twisting of scriptures to a similar passage in the Torah. God told Moses to remove his sandals (Exodus 3:5), so can we now claim that is 100% proof that all men are commanded to always wear sandals?
Of course not, because there is no sandal commandment and neither is there one for a head-covering.
If Paul taught that a woman must have a cloth head-covering on her head before she can go before Yahweh, why did the Torah require a woman to have her cloth head-covering removed before being presented to Yahweh?
“And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, If any man's wife go aside, and commit a trespass against him, and a man lie with her carnally…Then shall the man bring his wife unto the priest, and he shall bring her offering for her, the tenth part of an ephah of barley meal; he shall pour no oil upon it, nor put frankincense thereon; for it is an offering of jealousy, an offering of memorial, bringing iniquity to remembrance. And the priest shall bring her near, and set her before the LORD…And the priest shall set the woman before the LORD, and uncover the woman's head, and put the offering of memorial in her hands, which is the jealousy offering: and the priest shall have in his hand the bitter water that causeth the curse.“ Numbers 5:11-18
Note that these verses are not stating a commandment for women to wear a head-covering. Yet, since head-covering advocates have no real Torah commandment proving their false teaching, they resort to quoting this scripture and twisting it to fit, or making false presumptions. However, their teaching is actually refuted by this passage of scripture. They say Paul commanded a woman must have a head-covering ON before she goes before YHVH, but this passage in the Torah says her head-covering must be removed. This completely contradicts their claims.
How do the false teachers of the head-coverings movement come to their conclusion of there being a commandment?
Their claim is: because the priest had to remove a head-covering from the woman (Numbers 5), there must be an existing commandment prescribing all women to wear a head-covering. However, let's apply this same illogical twisting of scriptures to a similar passage in the Torah. God told Moses to remove his sandals (Exodus 3:5), so can we now claim that is 100% proof that all men are commanded to always wear sandals?
Of course not, because there is no sandal commandment and neither is there one for a head-covering.
False Teachers say it's a sin if a woman does not wear a head-covering
Some in the head-covering movement teach that if a woman does not wear a head-covering then that woman is sinning. The scriptures define sin as a violation of the law, or teachings, which are found in the Torah).
“Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.” 1 John 3:4.
“…Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.” Romans 4:15
“For the Law merely brings awareness of sin.” Romans 3:20
So how can not wearing a cloth head-covering be classified a sin if there is no commandment in the law that orders a woman to wear a head-covering? It is not a sin to go without a head-covering
Does this mean that the head-covering crowd is adding to the law? According to scriptures, if someone creates a new law (commandment) for head-coverings, then they are the one who is in serious error of violating Torah (Deuteronomy 4:2).
“Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.” 1 John 3:4.
“…Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.” Romans 4:15
“For the Law merely brings awareness of sin.” Romans 3:20
So how can not wearing a cloth head-covering be classified a sin if there is no commandment in the law that orders a woman to wear a head-covering? It is not a sin to go without a head-covering
Does this mean that the head-covering crowd is adding to the law? According to scriptures, if someone creates a new law (commandment) for head-coverings, then they are the one who is in serious error of violating Torah (Deuteronomy 4:2).
False Teachers claim that Paul created a NEW law commanding women to wear a head covering
Supporters and promoters of the head-covering movement will deny they are adding a new law to the Torah, but have no problem claiming Paul did. However, you will not find any examples of Paul violating the Torah by adding a new commandment that women must wear a cloth head-covering.
“Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.” Deuteronomy 4:2
In fact, Yeshua rebuked people for making their own traditions a new commandment or for using their traditions to take away from God’s commandments.
“But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?” Matthew 15:3
Even Paul himself advised people to avoid man-made commandments.
“Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.” Titus 1:14
“Which are all for destruction with the using, after the commands and teachings of men” Colossians 2:22
Therefore, if the head-covering movement makes claims that Paul added a new commandment to God's law, then they accuse Paul of violating the Torah, which commands us not to add to or take away from the law. We already see how both Paul and Yeshua warned against. It should be very clear that Paul would not command women to wear a cloth head-covering. Paul, because of false teachings being attempted in the church, simply pointed out to the Corinthian church that a woman already had a God given head covering that was her glory – Long hair!
The problem is the head-covering crowd cannot see the plain language in Paul's letter (1 Corinthians chapter 11)
Paul teaches men about the natural order as God created them - “Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. (vs 4) For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God (vs 7) Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?” (vs 14) – Paul is teaching that a man should not cover himself with long hair, because the man will appear as a woman, which goes against the nature of things.
Paul teaches women about the natural order as God created them - “But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. (vs 5) Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered? (vs 13) Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? (vs 14) But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.” (vs 15) –Clearly, we can see that according to Paul it was the natural long hair of the woman that was the true covering making a woman look like a woman, just as God designed it.
How much more plain does Paul need to make it? It should be pretty clear from his writings that “hair is given her for a covering.” If long hair is given to a woman as a covering by God, then why would Paul command a woman to wear a second covering made of cloth? That would be like saying the covering God gave a woman is not good enough.
“Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.” Deuteronomy 4:2
In fact, Yeshua rebuked people for making their own traditions a new commandment or for using their traditions to take away from God’s commandments.
“But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?” Matthew 15:3
Even Paul himself advised people to avoid man-made commandments.
“Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.” Titus 1:14
“Which are all for destruction with the using, after the commands and teachings of men” Colossians 2:22
Therefore, if the head-covering movement makes claims that Paul added a new commandment to God's law, then they accuse Paul of violating the Torah, which commands us not to add to or take away from the law. We already see how both Paul and Yeshua warned against. It should be very clear that Paul would not command women to wear a cloth head-covering. Paul, because of false teachings being attempted in the church, simply pointed out to the Corinthian church that a woman already had a God given head covering that was her glory – Long hair!
The problem is the head-covering crowd cannot see the plain language in Paul's letter (1 Corinthians chapter 11)
Paul teaches men about the natural order as God created them - “Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. (vs 4) For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God (vs 7) Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?” (vs 14) – Paul is teaching that a man should not cover himself with long hair, because the man will appear as a woman, which goes against the nature of things.
Paul teaches women about the natural order as God created them - “But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. (vs 5) Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered? (vs 13) Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? (vs 14) But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.” (vs 15) –Clearly, we can see that according to Paul it was the natural long hair of the woman that was the true covering making a woman look like a woman, just as God designed it.
How much more plain does Paul need to make it? It should be pretty clear from his writings that “hair is given her for a covering.” If long hair is given to a woman as a covering by God, then why would Paul command a woman to wear a second covering made of cloth? That would be like saying the covering God gave a woman is not good enough.
False Teachers claim a woman MUST keep her hair covered at all times or they will be responsible for causing a man to lust
If it were true that a woman must cover her hair, why did Yeshua allow a woman to expose her hair in his presence and in the presence of other men?
“And one of the Pharisees desired him that he would eat with him. And he went into the Pharisee's house, and sat down to meat. And, behold, a woman in the city, which was a sinner, when she knew that Jesus sat at meat in the Pharisee's house, brought an alabaster box of ointment, And stood at his feet behind him weeping, and began to wash his feet with tears, and did wipe them with the hairs of her head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with the ointment. Now when the Pharisee which had bidden him saw it, he spake within himself, saying, This man, if he were a prophet, would have known who and what manner of woman this is that toucheth him: for she is a sinner.” Luke 7:36-39
Notice that Yeshua never rebuked the woman for exposing her hair in his presence. If it WAS a sinful act as false head-covering teachings claim, why wouldn’t Yeshua correct her while she continued using her exposed hair to wipe his feet? Yeshua never rebukes her because exposing her hair is not a sin, further showing how the head-covering movement's teaching is false.
“And one of the Pharisees desired him that he would eat with him. And he went into the Pharisee's house, and sat down to meat. And, behold, a woman in the city, which was a sinner, when she knew that Jesus sat at meat in the Pharisee's house, brought an alabaster box of ointment, And stood at his feet behind him weeping, and began to wash his feet with tears, and did wipe them with the hairs of her head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with the ointment. Now when the Pharisee which had bidden him saw it, he spake within himself, saying, This man, if he were a prophet, would have known who and what manner of woman this is that toucheth him: for she is a sinner.” Luke 7:36-39
Notice that Yeshua never rebuked the woman for exposing her hair in his presence. If it WAS a sinful act as false head-covering teachings claim, why wouldn’t Yeshua correct her while she continued using her exposed hair to wipe his feet? Yeshua never rebukes her because exposing her hair is not a sin, further showing how the head-covering movement's teaching is false.
False Teachers twist the meaning of Shorn and Shaved to deny Paul said long hair was the real covering for a woman
There are people who dispute long hair as the head-covering Paul described in 1 Corinthians chapter 11. As proof text they often point to
1 Corinthians 11:6 which states:
“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.”
The cloth head-covering advocates use this verse to argue that being uncovered cannot mean short hair, because Paul said in verse 6 that if a woman’s hair is uncovered (short) she should be “shorn” or “shaven.” They will state her hair should be cut short or shaven bald if she chooses to remain uncovered. In other words, if uncovered means short hair, why would Paul say she must cut her short hair short or shave it, claiming the verse would be redundant. They conclude that the head-covering could not be long hair because being “uncovered” can not mean short hair. They then state that being “uncovered” can only mean the absence of a cloth head-covering .
However, this argument from head-covering advocates is incorrect, because “Shorn” does not only mean cutting your hair, but means shaving the head bald. Look at the following scripture using the same word that is used in 1 Corinthians chapter 11 for “Shorn”.
“And Paul after this tarried there yet a good while, and then took his leave of the brethren, and sailed thence into Syria, and with him Priscilla and Aquila; having shorn his head in Cenchrea: for he had a vow.” Acts 18:18
What vow did Paul have? He had a Nazarite vow, which required you to completely shave your head bald at the completion of your vow.
“And the Nazarite shall shave the head of his separation” Numbers 6:18
“We have four men which have a vow on them; them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads…” Acts 21:23-24
So we can see that shorn and shaved both mean bald, so what was Paul emphasizing when he said if a woman wants to go uncovered she should be shorn or shaved? He was stating that if a woman cuts her hair short or puts it up to look like a man then she should go even further and cut off all her hair or shave it bald to show how shameful it is for a woman to make herself look like a man. The point is if you cut your hair all off or shave it all off then the end result with either option is that a woman will still be completely bald. Therefore, if a woman wants to have short hair like a man then she should just take it to the extreme and go bald.
“But every woman that prays or prophesies with short hair dishonors her head: for that is the same as if she were bald. For if a woman has short hair like a man then let her cut her hair bald. However, if it is shameful for her to cut off her hair or shave it off then she should have long hair.” 1 Corinthians 11:5-6 (Paraphrase)
Therefore, the cloth head-covering advocates argument is defeated, because Paul did not say if a woman had short hair she should cut it short, which is redundant. Instead, Paul suggested that if a woman wants to look like a man with short hair then she should just go completely bald.
1 Corinthians 11:6 which states:
“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.”
The cloth head-covering advocates use this verse to argue that being uncovered cannot mean short hair, because Paul said in verse 6 that if a woman’s hair is uncovered (short) she should be “shorn” or “shaven.” They will state her hair should be cut short or shaven bald if she chooses to remain uncovered. In other words, if uncovered means short hair, why would Paul say she must cut her short hair short or shave it, claiming the verse would be redundant. They conclude that the head-covering could not be long hair because being “uncovered” can not mean short hair. They then state that being “uncovered” can only mean the absence of a cloth head-covering .
However, this argument from head-covering advocates is incorrect, because “Shorn” does not only mean cutting your hair, but means shaving the head bald. Look at the following scripture using the same word that is used in 1 Corinthians chapter 11 for “Shorn”.
“And Paul after this tarried there yet a good while, and then took his leave of the brethren, and sailed thence into Syria, and with him Priscilla and Aquila; having shorn his head in Cenchrea: for he had a vow.” Acts 18:18
What vow did Paul have? He had a Nazarite vow, which required you to completely shave your head bald at the completion of your vow.
“And the Nazarite shall shave the head of his separation” Numbers 6:18
“We have four men which have a vow on them; them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads…” Acts 21:23-24
So we can see that shorn and shaved both mean bald, so what was Paul emphasizing when he said if a woman wants to go uncovered she should be shorn or shaved? He was stating that if a woman cuts her hair short or puts it up to look like a man then she should go even further and cut off all her hair or shave it bald to show how shameful it is for a woman to make herself look like a man. The point is if you cut your hair all off or shave it all off then the end result with either option is that a woman will still be completely bald. Therefore, if a woman wants to have short hair like a man then she should just take it to the extreme and go bald.
“But every woman that prays or prophesies with short hair dishonors her head: for that is the same as if she were bald. For if a woman has short hair like a man then let her cut her hair bald. However, if it is shameful for her to cut off her hair or shave it off then she should have long hair.” 1 Corinthians 11:5-6 (Paraphrase)
Therefore, the cloth head-covering advocates argument is defeated, because Paul did not say if a woman had short hair she should cut it short, which is redundant. Instead, Paul suggested that if a woman wants to look like a man with short hair then she should just go completely bald.
False teachers claim that Paul taught a women must dress modest by wearing a head-covering
When Paul teaches on modesty did you know he never mentions a cloth head-covering?
“In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array.” 1 Timothy 2:9
Here Paul was stating that women must wear modest apparel. In our day and age we think that “modest” apparel is non-seductive apparel, but that is not what modest apparel means. Modest means you are humble, and don’t draw attention to yourself or stand out from the crowd by the way you dress. This is the opposite of what the head-covering movement teaches. Those who wear head-coverings want to wear beautiful and sometimes expensive head-coverings to draw attention to themselves. Even if they wear a subdued head-coverings, many want to stand out from the crowd and prove they are different, or more holy than others. Some even remark that many people come up to them when they wear their head-covering and ask questions about their head-covering wondering what religion they belong to.
This attitude is not being modest, but immodest by drawing attention to yourself. This type of approach can also be considered prideful and exhibiting a self-righteous pious attitude. You can argue all you want about how you are doing this to stand out from the crowd and show your self holy with good intentions, but Yeshua taught that this attitude was wrong when he saw it in the Pharisees.
“But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders [Tzitzit] of their garments.” Matthew 23:5
Unlike the head-covering, Yahweh actually commanded Israelites to wear fringes [Tzitzit] on their garments (Deuteronomy 22:12), but these proud Pharisees even turned their commanded apparel into a garment of hypocrisy and self-righteousness. The Pharisees lacked modesty because they wanted to “stand out” from the rest of israel and, of course, to look more "holy." The modern head-covering movement is following this same sin of pride, but do so without a Torah command to put a cloth head-covering on their head.
This does not apply to you if your head-covering is strictly a fashion article, but we are discussing women who feel the head-covering is a religious requirement the same as the Amish feel they must dress in clothes from the 1800's, the Catholic nuns who wear their head-covering or Muslims who wear full body coverings. So, you can dress super rich and stand out from the crowd, or you can wear sackcloth and ashes and stand out from the crowd, but both are wrong and are far from being modest.
"Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven.Moreover when ye fast, be not, as the hypocrites, of a sad countenance: for they disfigure their faces, that they may appear unto men to fast. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. But thou, when thou fastest, anoint thine head, and wash thy face; That thou appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father which is in secret: and thy Father, which seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly." Matthew 6:1, 16-18
It's an issue of attitude.
No mention of the head-covering
Paul told women not to wear their hair up in broided (braided) hair. However, wouldn’t this have been the perfect time for him to demand women to put on a cloth head-covering? Why would he rebuke women for wearing braided hair, when all he had to say was “women you must wear a head-covering?” Who would ever know if a woman had braided hair underneath her head-covering if she was commanded to cover all her hair? Yet Paul NEVER mentions a head-covering. You can say he did mention it when he told women to dress in modest apparel, but modest means you don't stand out from the crowd and not all women wore head-coverings. However, he didn't say it, and if he meant to do so he could of easily "commanded" it as head-covering advocates believe it did in 1 Cor. chapter 11. Also consider our day and age and culture. Women who wear head-coverings are easily mistaken for believers in Islam. This is hardly the association Torah women should be mistaken with.
Paul later tells women that they should not draw attention to themselves by their clothes, or what they do with their hair or what type of Jewelry they wear, but what needs to stand out is their godliness that can be seen by their good works. Yet, the head-covering is not even considered or suggested as part of your “good works.” If Paul taught the head-covering was a "commandment" and considered a "good work" then why didn't he mentioned it at this perfect moment? However, Yeshua and Paul did warn that the things you wear, such as the head-covering, could be part of your pride and pious arrogance as we can see exhibited by the clothing of the Pharisees.
“In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array.” 1 Timothy 2:9
Here Paul was stating that women must wear modest apparel. In our day and age we think that “modest” apparel is non-seductive apparel, but that is not what modest apparel means. Modest means you are humble, and don’t draw attention to yourself or stand out from the crowd by the way you dress. This is the opposite of what the head-covering movement teaches. Those who wear head-coverings want to wear beautiful and sometimes expensive head-coverings to draw attention to themselves. Even if they wear a subdued head-coverings, many want to stand out from the crowd and prove they are different, or more holy than others. Some even remark that many people come up to them when they wear their head-covering and ask questions about their head-covering wondering what religion they belong to.
This attitude is not being modest, but immodest by drawing attention to yourself. This type of approach can also be considered prideful and exhibiting a self-righteous pious attitude. You can argue all you want about how you are doing this to stand out from the crowd and show your self holy with good intentions, but Yeshua taught that this attitude was wrong when he saw it in the Pharisees.
“But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders [Tzitzit] of their garments.” Matthew 23:5
Unlike the head-covering, Yahweh actually commanded Israelites to wear fringes [Tzitzit] on their garments (Deuteronomy 22:12), but these proud Pharisees even turned their commanded apparel into a garment of hypocrisy and self-righteousness. The Pharisees lacked modesty because they wanted to “stand out” from the rest of israel and, of course, to look more "holy." The modern head-covering movement is following this same sin of pride, but do so without a Torah command to put a cloth head-covering on their head.
This does not apply to you if your head-covering is strictly a fashion article, but we are discussing women who feel the head-covering is a religious requirement the same as the Amish feel they must dress in clothes from the 1800's, the Catholic nuns who wear their head-covering or Muslims who wear full body coverings. So, you can dress super rich and stand out from the crowd, or you can wear sackcloth and ashes and stand out from the crowd, but both are wrong and are far from being modest.
"Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven.Moreover when ye fast, be not, as the hypocrites, of a sad countenance: for they disfigure their faces, that they may appear unto men to fast. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. But thou, when thou fastest, anoint thine head, and wash thy face; That thou appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father which is in secret: and thy Father, which seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly." Matthew 6:1, 16-18
It's an issue of attitude.
No mention of the head-covering
Paul told women not to wear their hair up in broided (braided) hair. However, wouldn’t this have been the perfect time for him to demand women to put on a cloth head-covering? Why would he rebuke women for wearing braided hair, when all he had to say was “women you must wear a head-covering?” Who would ever know if a woman had braided hair underneath her head-covering if she was commanded to cover all her hair? Yet Paul NEVER mentions a head-covering. You can say he did mention it when he told women to dress in modest apparel, but modest means you don't stand out from the crowd and not all women wore head-coverings. However, he didn't say it, and if he meant to do so he could of easily "commanded" it as head-covering advocates believe it did in 1 Cor. chapter 11. Also consider our day and age and culture. Women who wear head-coverings are easily mistaken for believers in Islam. This is hardly the association Torah women should be mistaken with.
Paul later tells women that they should not draw attention to themselves by their clothes, or what they do with their hair or what type of Jewelry they wear, but what needs to stand out is their godliness that can be seen by their good works. Yet, the head-covering is not even considered or suggested as part of your “good works.” If Paul taught the head-covering was a "commandment" and considered a "good work" then why didn't he mentioned it at this perfect moment? However, Yeshua and Paul did warn that the things you wear, such as the head-covering, could be part of your pride and pious arrogance as we can see exhibited by the clothing of the Pharisees.
False Teachers claim that Paul said a woman must wear a cloth head-covering when she prays and a man cannot wear any head-covering when he prays
Paul’s supposed lesson about men not being able to wear a cloth head-covering when they pray actually disproves the cloth head-covering teaching.
In 1 Corinthians 11:4, Paul said:
“Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.”
Notice he said “every man” without exception. Therefore, if the arguments from the head-covering movement are true about a cloth head-covering, then that means according to their teaching, that any man who wears a cloth head-covering while praying or prophesying dishonors his head.
Let’s look at the context of scripture and disprove this false teaching from the head-covering movement, by showing you men in the scriptures that prayed and prophesied while wearing a cloth head-covering.
1. David covered his head when he prayed: “And David went up by the ascent of mount Olivet, and wept as he went up, and had his head covered, and he went barefoot: and all the people that was with him covered every man his head, and they went up, weeping as they went up. .. And David said, O LORD, I pray thee…” 2 Samuel 15:31
2. Ezekiel was ordered by God to wear a cloth head-covering when he prophesied: “And there is a word of Yahweh unto me, saying… thy bonnet bind on thee…And I say unto them, ‘A word of Yahweh hath been unto me, saying…” Ezekiel 24:15, 17 & 20
3. The priests wore head-coverings when they ministered before Yahweh: “And they made coats of fine linen of woven work for Aaron, and for his sons, And a mitre of fine linen, and goodly bonnets of fine linen…” Exodus 39:27-28
Here we can see three scriptural examples of men wearing a cloth head-covering when praying and prophesying. Therefore, if Paul was teaching the Corinthian church that a man brings disgrace on himself if he wears a cloth head covering then Paul would be teaching against the context of scripture.
“Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God.” Corinthians 11:4&7
So, was Paul really teaching that a man cannot wear a cloth head-covering when he prays and prophesies, but a woman must? No!
Paul being a student of the scriptures would know full well that Yahweh ordered Ezekiel to prophecy with a cloth head-covering and should have also been aware that the priest wore cloth head-coverings when they ministered before Yahweh. It is also likely that Paul knew David covered his head in prayer. So, why would Paul contradict scripture and defame the characters of priests, a prophet and a king of Israel by claiming they brought shame upon themselves? The truth is that Paul did not say it was a disgrace for a man to wear a cloth head-covering when he prayed, or prophesied.
What Paul really taught was that if a man had long hair then that would be dishonorable to the man. What’s interesting is that this teaching that a man should not have long hair when praying or prophesying before Yahweh, actually lines up with the context of scripture.
The rules for those who ministered in the Temple states the following:
“Neither shall they shave their heads, nor suffer their locks [hair] to grow long.” Ezekiel 44:20
The priests were ordered by God to wear cloth head-coverings, but they could not let their hair grow long. This totally agrees with Paul’s teaching that if a man goes before Yahweh with long hair, then that man would be shameful as it was also shameful for the priest to do so.
“Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?” 1 Corinthians 11:14
Therefore based on the context of scripture, we can see that Paul was not teaching about a cloth head-covering pertaining to the man or the woman, but the covering that Paul mentioned was long hair.
“But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.” 1 Corinthians 11:15
But if a man has that same long hair as a covering he brings shame on his head. This is the real message from Paul, which is: let men look like men and women look like women. Men need to act like men and women need to act like women and neither should attempt to take on the role of the other.
Here is something else to think about:
If Paul truly taught that a woman must wear a cloth head-covering and that it was shameful for a man to wear one, then Paul would have been making a distinction between the garments of the genders.
“Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered [without a cloth head-covering] dishonoureth her head…” 1 Corinthians 11:4-5
Therefore, if this teaching is correct, then according to Paul it was appropriate for a woman to wear a cover on her head, but it was inappropriate for a man. So, if the cloth head-covering is a required garment for women but shameful for men, then what Paul is saying is that the cloth head-covering is the exclusive apparel for women and not men. If Paul is truly teaching this, then according to Torah it is a violation for any man to wear any apparel designated for women.
“The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.” Deuteronomy 22:5
This means that a man would actually violate Torah if he wore a bandana on his head, a Tallit over his head, a keffiyeh (Arab head scarf), a turban, a kippa, or any type of hat or head gear if Paul's teaching was correct according to the false teachers of head-coverings.
This is why it makes more sense to see that the covering is long hair just as Paul stated it was: “But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.” 1 Corinthians 11:15
Therefore, men should also not take on the appearance of a woman with long hair, which means in 1 Corinthians 11, Paul is teaching about the gender distinction pertaining to the hair of men and women, which agrees with the principals of Torah (Deut 22:5) and also Ezekiel 44:20.
Paul even told us to look at nature and how God created a man and a woman to be different according to their hair length.
“Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?” 1 Corinthians 11:14
The cloth head-covering makes no sense when we look at its application and how it goes against the context of scripture. If you followed the teachings of the head-covering advocates, then men would never be able to wear any covering on their head because it would be an exclusive article of clothing for women. ---This is why the teachings of the cloth head-covering movement are inaccurate.
However, the roles of a man and woman, and their distinct appearance exactly fits within Paul's message and perfectly lines up with the full context of scripture.
In 1 Corinthians 11:4, Paul said:
“Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.”
Notice he said “every man” without exception. Therefore, if the arguments from the head-covering movement are true about a cloth head-covering, then that means according to their teaching, that any man who wears a cloth head-covering while praying or prophesying dishonors his head.
Let’s look at the context of scripture and disprove this false teaching from the head-covering movement, by showing you men in the scriptures that prayed and prophesied while wearing a cloth head-covering.
1. David covered his head when he prayed: “And David went up by the ascent of mount Olivet, and wept as he went up, and had his head covered, and he went barefoot: and all the people that was with him covered every man his head, and they went up, weeping as they went up. .. And David said, O LORD, I pray thee…” 2 Samuel 15:31
2. Ezekiel was ordered by God to wear a cloth head-covering when he prophesied: “And there is a word of Yahweh unto me, saying… thy bonnet bind on thee…And I say unto them, ‘A word of Yahweh hath been unto me, saying…” Ezekiel 24:15, 17 & 20
3. The priests wore head-coverings when they ministered before Yahweh: “And they made coats of fine linen of woven work for Aaron, and for his sons, And a mitre of fine linen, and goodly bonnets of fine linen…” Exodus 39:27-28
Here we can see three scriptural examples of men wearing a cloth head-covering when praying and prophesying. Therefore, if Paul was teaching the Corinthian church that a man brings disgrace on himself if he wears a cloth head covering then Paul would be teaching against the context of scripture.
“Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God.” Corinthians 11:4&7
So, was Paul really teaching that a man cannot wear a cloth head-covering when he prays and prophesies, but a woman must? No!
Paul being a student of the scriptures would know full well that Yahweh ordered Ezekiel to prophecy with a cloth head-covering and should have also been aware that the priest wore cloth head-coverings when they ministered before Yahweh. It is also likely that Paul knew David covered his head in prayer. So, why would Paul contradict scripture and defame the characters of priests, a prophet and a king of Israel by claiming they brought shame upon themselves? The truth is that Paul did not say it was a disgrace for a man to wear a cloth head-covering when he prayed, or prophesied.
What Paul really taught was that if a man had long hair then that would be dishonorable to the man. What’s interesting is that this teaching that a man should not have long hair when praying or prophesying before Yahweh, actually lines up with the context of scripture.
The rules for those who ministered in the Temple states the following:
“Neither shall they shave their heads, nor suffer their locks [hair] to grow long.” Ezekiel 44:20
The priests were ordered by God to wear cloth head-coverings, but they could not let their hair grow long. This totally agrees with Paul’s teaching that if a man goes before Yahweh with long hair, then that man would be shameful as it was also shameful for the priest to do so.
“Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?” 1 Corinthians 11:14
Therefore based on the context of scripture, we can see that Paul was not teaching about a cloth head-covering pertaining to the man or the woman, but the covering that Paul mentioned was long hair.
“But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.” 1 Corinthians 11:15
But if a man has that same long hair as a covering he brings shame on his head. This is the real message from Paul, which is: let men look like men and women look like women. Men need to act like men and women need to act like women and neither should attempt to take on the role of the other.
Here is something else to think about:
If Paul truly taught that a woman must wear a cloth head-covering and that it was shameful for a man to wear one, then Paul would have been making a distinction between the garments of the genders.
“Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered [without a cloth head-covering] dishonoureth her head…” 1 Corinthians 11:4-5
Therefore, if this teaching is correct, then according to Paul it was appropriate for a woman to wear a cover on her head, but it was inappropriate for a man. So, if the cloth head-covering is a required garment for women but shameful for men, then what Paul is saying is that the cloth head-covering is the exclusive apparel for women and not men. If Paul is truly teaching this, then according to Torah it is a violation for any man to wear any apparel designated for women.
“The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.” Deuteronomy 22:5
This means that a man would actually violate Torah if he wore a bandana on his head, a Tallit over his head, a keffiyeh (Arab head scarf), a turban, a kippa, or any type of hat or head gear if Paul's teaching was correct according to the false teachers of head-coverings.
This is why it makes more sense to see that the covering is long hair just as Paul stated it was: “But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.” 1 Corinthians 11:15
Therefore, men should also not take on the appearance of a woman with long hair, which means in 1 Corinthians 11, Paul is teaching about the gender distinction pertaining to the hair of men and women, which agrees with the principals of Torah (Deut 22:5) and also Ezekiel 44:20.
Paul even told us to look at nature and how God created a man and a woman to be different according to their hair length.
“Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?” 1 Corinthians 11:14
The cloth head-covering makes no sense when we look at its application and how it goes against the context of scripture. If you followed the teachings of the head-covering advocates, then men would never be able to wear any covering on their head because it would be an exclusive article of clothing for women. ---This is why the teachings of the cloth head-covering movement are inaccurate.
However, the roles of a man and woman, and their distinct appearance exactly fits within Paul's message and perfectly lines up with the full context of scripture.
False Teachers claim the head-covering will make women HOLY
Many in the head-covering movement believe that when a woman wears a head-covering they are somehow more holy than a woman that does not wear a head-covering. Can a piece of cloth on your head really make you holy? This type of teaching is not only false, but also very heretical.
- “When Jehu was come to Jezreel, Jezebel heard of it; and she painted her eyes, and attired her head, and looked out at the window.”
2 Kings 9:30.
Did the head-covering Jezebel placed on her head make her holy? No!
- Did the head-covering the women of Israel wore on their heads and that God later removed from them make them holy? (Isaiah 3:16-24) No!
- In Matthew 23:5, the Pharisees dressed by the way God commanded them, but did this make them holy? No!
We can never teach that we can make someone holy by changing the way they dress or by putting a cloth on their head. Real holiness only comes from Yeshua (Jesus) and the inner work of the Holy Spirit.
“Wherefore by works of law shall no flesh be declared righteous before Him” Romans 3:20
“Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost.” Titus 3:5
“Sanctify them by the truth; thy word is truth.” John 17:17
“Let your beauty be not just the outward adorning…but in the hidden person of the heart, in the incorruptible adornment of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God very precious.” 1 Peter 3:3-4
If you seek holiness then don't go out and buy a head-covering thinking it will make you holy. True holiness can only come from inner change by YHVH.
Seek it!! Do it!! And don't get caught up in every wind of doctrine. Test everything people tell you or attempt to teach you.
- “When Jehu was come to Jezreel, Jezebel heard of it; and she painted her eyes, and attired her head, and looked out at the window.”
2 Kings 9:30.
Did the head-covering Jezebel placed on her head make her holy? No!
- Did the head-covering the women of Israel wore on their heads and that God later removed from them make them holy? (Isaiah 3:16-24) No!
- In Matthew 23:5, the Pharisees dressed by the way God commanded them, but did this make them holy? No!
We can never teach that we can make someone holy by changing the way they dress or by putting a cloth on their head. Real holiness only comes from Yeshua (Jesus) and the inner work of the Holy Spirit.
“Wherefore by works of law shall no flesh be declared righteous before Him” Romans 3:20
“Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost.” Titus 3:5
“Sanctify them by the truth; thy word is truth.” John 17:17
“Let your beauty be not just the outward adorning…but in the hidden person of the heart, in the incorruptible adornment of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God very precious.” 1 Peter 3:3-4
If you seek holiness then don't go out and buy a head-covering thinking it will make you holy. True holiness can only come from inner change by YHVH.
Seek it!! Do it!! And don't get caught up in every wind of doctrine. Test everything people tell you or attempt to teach you.
