"Every man that has something on his head while praying or
prophesying disgraces his head. For a man ought not to have
his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God"
This is a command from YHWH, through Paul. If a man wears a head covering while praying or prophesying, he is showing reverence for the talmud, and he disgraces himself and disobeys YHWH. Even though the Levitical priests wore a head covering, they were a temporary priesthood. The order of Melchizedek existed long before Aaron was born. The Levitical priests also wore many other clothes that we don't wear today. These clothing rules were specifically for Levites, and during services. For example, the High priest wore the breastplate, but not all Israelites had to wear it. The Levites had to keep their hair trimmed, but nazirites could not cut their hair. Many a Christian may say that Samson had long hair, but it is a shame for a man to have long hair now. What was a sin then may not be a sin now. Paul was a Jew, and a Pharisee as well. He knew Torah better than you or me. He knew that men should uncover their heads when we pray or prophesy, and women should cover their heads. By wearing a kippah or other head covering during prayer or prophesying, you are doing what YHWH commanded women to do and not men. Modern messianics have a hard time with the writings of Paul because he breaks the talmud, perhaps more than anyone besides Yahshua. What they fail to see is that Paul was a Pharisee. He kept the talmud as it was then. Until he realized that the talmud was a man-made dogmatic burden. That is why Yahshua nailed it to the cross. We cannot keep the laws of man (talmud) if they contradict the Holy Laws of YHWH.
Paul knew that the Levitical priesthood ended when Yahshua was crucified. This message was not Paul's "general advice just for Corinthians only". It is a message to all mankind from YHWH. A Messianic Levite was a guest speaker at our congregation and he left his head uncovered the whole time. Just because the Levitical priests wore a headcovering for a temporary period of time does not mean all men should wear a kippah. Nowhere in the Bible are we told that all men must wear a headcovering, as this would clearly contradict YHWH's message in Corinthians. The custom of a man keeping his head covered is not Biblical. Although you may try to use the Levitical priests as an example, we are not Levitical priests. And if a Levitical priest believes in Yahshua, he is no longer a Levitical priest. Instead, he is now greater. Part of the "royal priesthood".
1Pe 2:9But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:
Heb 5:1For every high priest taken from among men is ordained for men in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins:
Heb 5:2Who can have compassion on the ignorant, and on them that are out of the way; for that he himself also is compassed with infirmity.
Heb 5:3And by reason hereof he ought, as for the people, so also for himself, to offer for sins.
Heb 5:4And no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.
Heb 5:5So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee.
Heb 5:6As he saith also in another place, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.
Heb 5:7Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared;
Heb 5:8Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
Heb 5:9And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;
Heb 5:10Called of God an high priest after the order of Melchisedec.
Paul wrote "head", not "face". If he meant face, he would have wrote face. I believe he was referring to a head covering of any kind, including veils, but also hats. Since he does not specifically say "wearing a veil", but instead "head covered". Artwork of early Messianic men had the head uncovered. Women were covered. The tradition of wearing a kippah or skullcap is first seen among the Roman Catholics. Look at the cardinals today, they still wear a red skullcap. I do not know why the Jews chose to adopt a custom of the Roman Catholics, unless it was to avoid persecution. I would rather obey the plain words of YHWH than twist what He commands so that we can keep a Roman custom.
Paul's topic in this chapter is what is appropriate for men and for women. Men should have short hair, women should have long. Men should pray or prophesy with the head uncovered, women should have it covered. These are direct opposites. If men and women dress alike, it causes confusion between the genders. It's hard to tell who is male and female if they dress the same.
Paul was not writing against Torah. We must remember that the Levitical system was temporary, the Melchizedek priesthood is eternal, it existed before Levi, and it exists after.
I strongly suggest reading Paul's letter to the Hebrews, especially chapter 7.
Heb 7:12For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.
Again the word indicates that which covers entirely or hides i.e. "veils" so a hat CANNOT be what Paul refers to here. Only something that covers the entire head (like a veil).
Remember Paul does not add to Torah, he can only elaborate on it. What Torah command is it that you think Paul refers to here? I would say that he refers to that commandment against a man wearing that which pertains to a woman.
BTW the High Priest was commanded to wear a hat, so even if your interpretation were correct, Paul would be saying that YHWH commanded the High Priest to commit an abomination.
I know Hebrews well, I translated it from the original Hebrew. The Hebrew and English are available in Parallel columns at:
There is also the Hebraic Roots Commentary to Hebrews at http://www.lulu.com/nazarene
The following ins an excerpt from the commentary:
7:12 But as a renewal is in the priesthood, so a renewal also is in the Torah.
Paul later equates the oath which makes the Melchizadek figure "a priest forever" (Ps. 110:4) with the "New (or renewed) Covenant" (Jer. 31:31-34). The word for "renewal" in 7:12 is in the Aramaic shuchlapa from a root which means "to change, transform or renew." Here context indicates renewal.
Monte Judah writes:
Let's conduct our own examination of the book of Hebrews to see if the author was "pro-Torah" using just a few clips of the writer's presentation.... He wrote that there must be changes to the Law of Moses (Heb 7:12) because the priesthood has changed from Levite to Melchizedek....let's ask some fundamental questions at this point.
These are the questions that should cause you to pause and question whether this book is consistent with the rest of the Scriptures. ... Do we believe that some of the commandments given in the Torah should be changed?
He basis this on the Greek version of Hebrews 7:12 which reads:
For the priesthood being changed,
there is made of necessity a change also of the law.
- Heb. 7:12 KJV (from the Greek)
However the word for "change/changed" here in the Hebrew is SHENISHTANA from the verb root SH-N-H (Strong's 8131) meaning "to repeat, to do a second time" thus the Hebraic Roots Version reads:
It is saying that according to which there is a repetition of the
office of the priesthood, of necessity it is saying there is a repetition of the Torah.
- Heb. 7:12 HRV
In the original Hebrew there is no indication that the Torah or any of its commandments are changed, only that they are repeated. This repetition is all part of the renewal of Torah which is a primary paradigm of the Book of Hebrews in the original Hebrew.
As for the Melchizadek priesthood, the phrase "according to the order of" in the Hebrew may also be translated "by the same reason as". Messiah was a priest by the same reason as Melchizadek. Melchizadek was able to be a priest without being a Levite by virtue of the fact that he received the priesthood BEFORE the Torah limited it to Levites. Messiah was a priest BY THE SAME REASON as Melchizadek because he also received it before the Torah limited it to Levites and thus has it eternally.
James, I am aware that the Melchizedek priesthood already existed before Levi, I stated that above. The change in the priesthood Paul referred to was a change back to the original priesthood. Paul explains that well enough. Yes there are changes from the Torah. We no longer have to offer sacrifices for sin, for one. Remember that Abraham kept the Torah, as it was then. The Torah is the whole Bible, from Genesis to Revelation. Yeshua came to fulfill or complete the Torah. By your logic, only the laws in the Pentatuech need to be followed.
James, please show me what dictionary you are using because I am using Strong's.
1Co 11:4EveryG3956 manG435 prayingG4336 orG2228 prophesying,G4395 havingG2192 his head covered,G2596 G2776 dishonourethG2617 hisG848 head.G2776
This is a command from YHWH, through Paul.
If a man wears a head covering while praying or prophesying, he is showing reverence for the talmud, and he disgraces himself and disobeys YHWH.
Paul was a Jew, and a Pharisee as well. He knew Torah better than you or me. He knew that men should uncover their heads when we pray or prophesy, and women should cover their heads. By wearing a kippah or other head covering during prayer or prophesying, you are doing what YHWH commanded women to do and not men.
Modern messianics have a hard time with the writings of Paul because he breaks the talmud, perhaps more than anyone besides Yahshua.
What they fail to see is that Paul was a Pharisee. He kept the talmud as it was then. Until he realized that the talmud was a man-made dogmatic burden.
That is why Yahshua nailed it to the cross.
We cannot keep the laws of man (talmud) if they contradict the Holy Laws of YHWH.
Paul knew that the Levitical priesthood ended when Yahshua was crucified. This message was not Paul's "general advice just for Corinthians only". It is a message to all mankind from YHWH.
A Messianic Levite was a guest speaker at our congregation and he left his head uncovered the whole time.
The custom of a man keeping his head covered is not Biblical.
Although you may try to use the Levitical priests as an example, we are not Levitical priests. And if a Levitical priest believes in Yahshua, he is no longer a Levitical priest. Instead, he is now greater. Part of the "royal priesthood".
The Greek word in 1Cor. 11:4 is KATA "down over"
The Aramaic word is K'SA "covered, concealed, hidden"
I am defending a Jewish tradition which was adopted by Roman Catholics.
Hegesippus the Nazarene writes of the Apostasy which began in the late first century saying:
Up to that period (98 CE) the Assembly had remained like a virgin
pure and uncorrupted: for, if there were any persons who were
disposed to tamper with the wholesome rule of the proclaiming of
salvation, they still lurked in some dark place of concealment or
other. But, when the sacred band of Emissaries had in various ways
closed their lives, and that generation of men to whom it had been
vouchsafed to listen to the inspired Wisdom with their own ears had
passed away, then did the confederacy of godless error take its rise
through the treachery of false teachers, who, seeing that none of
the emissaries any longer survived, at length
attempted with bare and uplifted head to oppose the proclaiming of
the truth by proclaiming "knowledge falsely so called."
(Hegesippus the Nazarene; c. 185 CE; quoted by Eusebius in Eccl.
Point being that the Nazarenes wore the Kippah and the apostatizing Gentile Christians often did not.
Paul says "Messiah our Passover is sacrificed for us THEREFORE LET US KEEP THE FEAST..." (1Cor. 5:7-8). The fact that Messiah fulfills the typological meaning of a an element of Torah does not mean we no longer keep that element, it means we keep it all the more, now with a full knowledge of why, and what it represents.
2 Cor.3:13-18 And not as Moshe, which put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished: But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Mashiach. But even unto this day, when Mosehe is read, the vail is upon their heart. Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away. Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord. (Ex.34:33-35)
Perhaps a bit off subject
Interesting angle in relation to the culture and immoratity of the nations ("Greeks"). The culture of the audience seems to be somewhat helpful to understanding the perversion. I have always heard 1 Cor.11:4 was about perversion in relation to shame (fornication/ immoral /homosexuality/ effeminate/). I knew that it was tradition that women be veiled for being uncovered would be a shame (as being shaved in the same culture). The passage is refering to the differ gendar roles (vs.3,7,8,9,13,14)as well. Vs 10 says Cause of the angels? (Gen 6?) If it is in relation to Gen 6 this would lead me to think it would be perversion for a man to be veiled (vs7)in realtion to being effeminate or even in realtion to being submisive to seducing spirits. (IMO, fellowship with an un conservative woman may tempt a man to have a more physical focuss 2 Cor.4:18). My views have seemed to me to be vague on the context of men not being "veiled" (having their head covered) but after seeing more conformation from another angle i tend see it more clearly.
AMEN! You just about said it all Bro. Kaplan. If I may add something, I have found that a good number (certainly not all) of those who oppose headcoverings for men have a latent anti-Semetic tendency deep in their hearts. We do well to remember 2 Shemuel (2 Samuel) 15:30 as additional proof that Hebrew men did indeed cover their heads, at least while worshipping. And that was written long before the Talmud came into existance.