Paul said that men shouldn't cover their heads and if a man has long hair it's a disgrace to him. See 1 Corinthians 11:14 & verse 7
FFOZ's Messiah Journal #100 (spring 09) has a 16 page article on why this is the wrong way to understand what Paul said. Here is an excerpt:
The answers to all of these questions relate
to how we understand Paul’s instructions
to the community in Corinth in 1 Corinthians
11:1–16. It is a difficult passage that has
caused a great deal of confusion. It raises further
questions about hair length, grooming,
gender roles, the presence of angels, and other
tangential curiosities. It has implications for
how we dress and how we relate in different
cultural contexts.
The primary difficulty with the passage
comes from a lack of contextual information.
In this paper, I hope to provide some missing
information, thereby enabling the reader to
draw conclusions for practical application.
In the process, I hope to shed some light on
Paul’s communities in general, particularly
regarding their relationship with greater first century
Judaism.
A surface reading of 1 Corinthians 11:1–16
seems to suggest that Paul was introducing
some halachic (“legal”) decisions for the Corinthians
about their apparel and grooming. For
example, he says that men should have short
hair and bare heads. Short hair because “nature
itself teach[es] you that if a man has long hair,
it is a dishonor to him” (11:14); bare heads
because “every man who has something on his
head while praying or prophesying disgraces
his head” (11:4). Furthermore, “A man ought
not to have his head covered, since he is the
image and glory of God” (11:7). Both of these
propositions are problematic from a biblical
perspective.
For example, the Nazarite vow of Numbers
6 requires a man to grow his hair. Samson,
Samuel, John the Baptist, and even Paul himself
are examples of biblical heroes who undertook
Nazarite vows.1 The testimony of Acts 21
suggests that Nazirism was popular among the
Jewish believers. How could Paul claim that
long hair is a dishonor when long hair is the
very mark of piety for those who underwent
the Nazarite vow?
Moreover, the Torah commands the priesthood
to wear headgear when they minister in
the Temple. God commanded the high priest
to wear a turban and a golden miter, and the
regular priests to wear special caps.2 Is it conceivable
that Paul, who frequently visited the
Temple to participate in prayer and the services
therein, was dismissing the priestly garments
as a disgrace to “the image and glory
of God”? The Torah itself says that the priestly
garments were given for glory and beauty:
You shall make holy garments for Aaron
your brother, for glory and for beauty … you
shall make caps for them, for glory and for
beauty. (Exodus 28:2, 40)
If we take 1 Corinthians 11:1–16 at face
value, we are forced to concede that Paul is
indeed contradicting the Torah’s own commandments
regarding priests and Nazarites.
A third objection to 1 Corinthians can be
raised—the Torah commands all Jewish men
to wear tefillin (phylacteries) on their hands
and heads: “They shall be as frontals on your
forehead” (Deuteronomy 6:8). The custom of
wearing tefillin seems to have been nearly universal
in Second-Temple Judaism.3 If 1 Corinthians
11:7 is understood as a general prohibition
on men wearing something on their head
in worship, it stands in direct contradiction to
Torah and Jewish practice regarding tefillin.
For traditional Christian interpreters, these
contradictions present no difficulty because
traditional Christianity has always taught that
Paul overturned Torah law and established
the new Christian religion. Taking it even further,
traditional interpreters often point out
that because Jewish men cover their heads in
prayer, Paul forbade the practice to differentiate
Christians from Jews. 4
A more responsible reading of Paul’s mission
and objectives, however, reveals the traditional
Christian explanation to be deficient.
Paul was neither overturning Torah law nor
establishing a new religion.5 In his own words,
Paul did “nothing against our people or the
customs of our fathers” (Acts 28:17). Paul
believed “everything that is in accordance
with the Torah” (Acts 24:14), and he agreed
“with the Torah, confessing that the Torah is
good” (Romans 7:16). Paul “lived as a Pharisee
according to the strictest sect of our religion”
(Acts 26:5), and even after becoming
a believer continued to identify himself as
“a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees” (Acts 23:6).
It is difficult to square Paul’s description of
himself with the notion that he wanted to
overturn Torah and Jewish custom, especially
when he begins 1 Corinthians 11 with the
words, “Be imitators of me.”
Jewish Tradition in 1 Corinthians 11
Paul was not attempting to overturn Jewish
practice in Corinth. The opposite is true. He
opens the chapter by saying, “I praise you
because you remember me in everything and
hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered
them to you” (1 Corinthians 11:2). The word
used here for “traditions” is the Greek paradosis
(παραδσις); it is the same word the Apostolic
Scriptures typically use for Jewish tradition.
For example:
For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not
eat unless they carefully wash their hands,
thus observing the traditions (paradosis) of
the elders. (Mark 7:3)
Paul was not attempting to
overturn Jewish practice in
Corinth. The opposite is true.
“Neglecting the commandment of God,
you hold to the tradition (paradosis) of men.”
He was also saying to them, “You are experts
at setting aside the commandment of God
in order to keep your tradition (paradosis).”
(Mark 7:8–9)
I was advancing in Judaism beyond
many of my contemporaries among my
countrymen, being more extremely zealous
for my ancestral traditions (paradosis).
(Galatians 1:14)
Paradosis literally means, “something handed
down.” It is the normal, New Testament word for
Jewish “tradition.” Most commentators refuse
the notion that Paul might have been referring
to the norms of Jewish tradition in this passage.
Instead, they suppose that Paul was referring
to a distinct Christian paradosis. Witherington
says, “It is difficult to believe that [Paul]
would impose a specifically Jewish custom on
Christians … [The Corinthian believers] were
to model new Christian customs.”6
I find it far more difficult to believe that
Paul and the Apostles were in the business of
inventing new customs and traditions simply
for the sake of making a distinction from
Judaism. That kind of thinking is anachronistic.
Paul and the early believers—even the
Corinthians—believed they were a sect within
greater Judaism.
The first assembly of believers in Corinth
was right next door to the Corinthian synagogue.
7 The first members all came from the
synagogue, including “Crispus, the leader of
the synagogue … with all his household” (Acts
18:8). Though the Corinthian community was
a mix of Jews and Gentiles, it was born of a Jewish
synagogue and existed in the context of a
Diaspora Jewish community. As Paul sought to
bring correction to the Corinthians regarding
their mode of dress and grooming, he appealed
to the authority of apostolic tradition and the
broader authority of Jewish tradition, saying,
“if one is inclined to be contentious, we have
no other practice, nor have the [assemblies] of
God” (1 Corinthians 11:16).
The term “assemblies of God” does not
refer to other congregations of believers.8
Instead it stands in antithesis to the congregations
of the believers who are represented
as the “we” of 11:16. With all due apologies
to the Assemblies of God denomination, the
term “assemblies of God” is best understood
as Jewish synagogues in general.9 I understand
the verse as follows:
We [the believers and apostolic communities]
have no other practice, nor have the
[synagogues] of God. (1 Corinthians 11:16)
Therefore Paul was not overturning
Jewish practice or tradition (paradosis) in
1 Corinthians 11. Instead, by admission of
his own argumentation, he was reinforcing
Jewish tradition and bringing it to bear on the
Corinthian community. This is consistent with
his opening words: “Be imitators of me, just as
I also am of Messiah” (1 Corinthians 11:1).
We have already seen that Paul was an
observant Jew who kept both Torah and Jewish
tradition. The same was true of the Master.
Paul imitated Yeshua, an observant Jew, and
the Corinthians were expected to imitate Paul.
That being the case, how can Paul urge the
Corinthian men to go bareheaded unless that
was the norm of Jewish tradition in the days
of the Apostles?