SermonIndex Audio Sermons
SermonIndex - Promoting Revival to this Generation
Give To SermonIndex
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : We need to cover head covering

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 Next Page )
PosterThread
theopenlife
Member



Joined: 2007/1/30
Posts: 926


 Re:

Quote:
Narrowpath your are Pharisee and a blind man may you some day find the truth out.



Ouch... I'm wondering if that was that necessary or truthful. I haven't once heard Narrowpath say that head coverings are necessary to salvation.

I'm not resolved on this issue, but I cannot deny the merit of both sides either.

Let's get our ducks in order... Who has supported head coverings in the past? Augustine, Chrysostom, Luther, Calvin, Knox, Matthew Henry, Baxter, Watchman Nee. So the men who taught grace the loudest were slaves to a pharasaism? I think not. Perhaps they took a different view of the whole issue which translated not into bondage, but blessings.

Nee taught that women ought to wear a covering during congregational gatherings. Calvin, Nee, and Matthew Henry all agreed that coverings did not have to be any particular type, size, or color so long as they clearly indicated a "covering" over the head. Hair could be visible.

Men who prayed or taught publicly were to remove their hat briefly before doing so to indicate that Christ was their head, or basis of authority, when they represented Him in His Church. They could then put the hat back on to prevent sickness.

They did not teach that women must be covered at all times to pray, or else they would have had to teach men to be uncovered at all times to pray. Try that in sub-zero temperatures, or on a motorcycle, or construction site!

The issue is decorum and order. God's concern is order in the society of the church and it is a statement to the legions of angels who cast off their head, God, to show their own heads of authority. Likewise, the head of woman is man. She hides her head, so to speak, to acknowledge the authority given by God to man. Man's authority comes from Christ, and Christ's from God, so that there is only one head - that of God passing through Christ, represented in man.

Read Nee's article!

 2008/2/14 12:52Profile









 Re:

Quote:
You have been bewitched and you are under a spell doing a thing which does not need to be done. The only way you'll ever see is when your eyes are open.



The exegesis and hermeneutics used to establish this comment are absurd. I don't know if I should laugh or cry.

Quote:
I was blind and know I see, I was deaf but know I hear. I hope that will be your testimony one day.



Pure garbage.

-Jim

 2008/2/14 12:52









 Re: We need to cover head covering



Just to drop in an out, if I may....

I used to go to churches where not to cover one's head would make it look as if one is in rebellion. Also, I've heard an elder say, (in an impromtu situation where not every woman had a head-covering with her) 'Have your head covered in your heart'. That made sense in that moment.


The best sermon I ever heard on head-covering began in the Old Testament, and explained why it was the [u]men should take [i]their[/i] [b]head-covering[/b] [i][b]off[/u][/i][/b], because of believing in Christ.

I've heard other sermons, but this is the only one which made sense.


I wonder if any of the participants in this thread have any idea why Jewish men wore a head-covering, or, why in Christ is should be removed?


If this point has been 'covered' in this thread already.... I apologise.


As I can't remember how it was explained, I'd be grateful to hear from someone who can bring up the appropriate scriptures, to remind me. Thanks.

:-)

 2008/2/14 12:59
murrcolr
Member



Joined: 2007/4/25
Posts: 1839
Scotland, UK

 Re:

But in vain do they worship me, Teaching as their doctrines the precepts of men.

Let them alone: they are blind guides. And if the blind guide the blind, both shall fall into a pit.


_________________
Colin Murray

 2008/2/14 13:08Profile









 Re:

murrcolr - your fruit gives you away. The soon coming day of fire will reveal all things.

 2008/2/14 13:18
ccchhhrrriiisss
Member



Joined: 2003/11/23
Posts: 4779


 Re:

Hi murrcolr...

Quote:
But in vain do they worship me, Teaching as their doctrines the precepts of men.

Let them alone: they are blind guides. And if the blind guide the blind, both shall fall into a pit.


???

Brother, you might reconsider the tone of your posts. Are you saying that anyone who doesn't agree with your doctrinal view about a man-made head covering is [i]worshipping in vain[/i]? Since none of us have "arrived" to perfection in all things -- we should have charitable patience with the brethren (including those brethren with whom we disagree - I Corinthians 13:1-3).

In addition to my earlier post on this matter, I was wondering if there is a single passage of Scripture OUTSIDE OF the much quoted passage in I Corinthians chapter 11 that deals with this issue? Is there even a second passage upon which this practice is directly based? Is there even a truly historical anecdote that shows that this was a custom of the early Church (or even amongst the Jews)?

When I read I Corinthians 11, it seems clear (at least, to [i]me[/i]) that this covering is not a man-made hair jacket. The scriptures seem to equate this “covering” with “hair” (I Corinthians 11:6, 14-15). Why else would there be two separate discussions within this single monologue (verses 3-16)? Is Paul discussing hair AND man-made head coverings…or is he speaking about the idea of a simple covering upon a woman’s head?

“But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: [b][i]for her hair is given her for a covering[/i][/b].” - I Corinthians 11:15

In addition, what is the purpose for these instructions? Paul writes about how a woman who prays with her head uncovered “dishonors her head” (verse 5). A man is the “covering” (authority) of a woman just as Christ is the “covering” (authority) of the Church. Is it proper to show a “nude” (shaved) head – or one that has been naturally endowed with proper propriety? Women grow hair at a naturally more rapid rate than men, and it is simply the “nature of things” to see women with a complete scalp/neck covering of long hair. Likewise, men tend to abstain from long hair. Hair has long been equated with the variance in sexes -- especially in a time when everyone wore similar robes. It is simply not natural for men to wear their hair long (or women to wear it like a man).

During the decades preceding the birth of Christ, women in the Roman Empire began to experience a newfound “epiphany” of freedom. During this time, some women even began to shave their heads (look at images of Egyptians like Cleopatra) or crop it and clip it back (like women living in Greece) as a symbol of this new feminism. This practice “caught on” in Europe. Likewise, short hair was historically a reflection of a man. A woman who wanted to “disguise” herself as a man? She cut off her hair. In the rugged years before Mary Kay and Avon, this had a beguiling effect of changing the entire appearance of a woman. Even in the United States, women traditionally kept their hair long UNTIL the “roaring” 1920s, where “flapper” women experiencing another feminist period of “liberty” decided to cut their hair in an almost masculine way (like the “Bob and Shingle” – or “bob”). At the time, this hair was reflective of “counter culture” – much the same way that long hair became upon men in the 1960s and 1970s.

As I said earlier, it is with great caution that one should mandate a practice. The Mormons base their "baptism for the dead" upon a passage in I Corinthians chapter 15 (verse 29). The Pentecostal "snake handlers" of the Appalachians base their practice upon Mark 16:18. Even the Cuanderos (hybrid Roman Catholic/voodoo faith healers of Latin America) base the practices upon a passage in Isaiah chapter 38 (citing verse 21). Do you see the problem that could arise out of basing a doctrine or practice upon a single passage of Scripture?

Here is what I sense about this (so please take this with a “grain of salt”):
We realize that Christ is the covering of the Church and man is the covering of the woman. Thus, this [i]natural[/i] covering displays the [i]natural[/i] order that God created for the world. A woman is not to take upon herself the authority of a man. God made MAN (and angels) in his image, and woman was created in the image of man. Long hair has become a distinction between the two sexes. This could reflect the reasoning behind verse 10 (“[i]…and because of the angels…[/i]).” A woman’s natural covering (her hair) displays a different glory. This hair distinguishes her to be loved and cherished as a treasured gift that God gave to man.

:-)


_________________
Christopher

 2008/2/14 13:27Profile









 Re:

1 Cor 14:34

Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.

How is it possible for women to prophesy with or without a head covering? According to Paul, they can't speak either way.

Paul's role was to spread the faith; not to make up rules for worship that Jesus didn't already voice for us. If something Paul says doesn't fit with what Jesus taught, you know who to follow.

(I know my sister in law, a pastor in the Lutheran Church, would lambaste me if i ever asked why she disobeyed Paul's injunction against women preaching, or questioned why she didn't wear a head covering in the pulpit.) :-?

bub

 2008/2/14 13:29
murrcolr
Member



Joined: 2007/4/25
Posts: 1839
Scotland, UK

 Re:

THE VEIL
According to Rabbi Dr. Menachem M. Brayer (Professor of Biblical Literature at Yeshiva University) in his book, The Jewish woman in Rabbinic literature, it was the custom of Jewish women to go out in public with a head covering which, sometimes, even covered the whole face leaving one eye free. He quotes some famous ancient Rabbis saying," It is not like the daughters of Israel to walk out with heads uncovered" and "Cursed be the man who lets the hair of his wife be seen a woman who exposes her hair for self-adornment brings poverty." Rabbinic law forbids the recitation of blessings or prayers in the presence of a bareheaded married woman since uncovering the woman's hair is considered "nudity". Dr. Brayer also mentions that "During the Tannaitic period the Jewish woman's failure to cover her head was considered an affront to her modesty. When her head was uncovered she might be fined four hundred zuzim for this offense." Dr. Brayer also explains that veil of the Jewish woman was not always considered a sign of modesty. Sometimes, the veil symbolized a state of distinction and luxury rather than modesty. The veil personified the dignity and superiority of noble women. It also represented a woman's inaccessibility as a sanctified possession of her husband.

So we can see out of this extract from a book that in the Jewish Tradition women wore veils.

1Cor 11:2 Now I praise you that ye remember me in all things, and hold fast the traditions, even as I delivered them to you.

Tradition meaning: The passing down of elements of a culture from generation to generation, especially by oral communication.

1Cor 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.

If the woman is unveiled it the same as if she was shaven this is what the scripture say.

1Cor 11:6 For if a woman is not veiled, let her also be shorn: but if it is a shame to a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be veiled.

Same thing here if the woman is unveiled let her be shorn but if it a shame let her be veiled.

1Cor 11:13 Judge ye (1) in yourselves: is it seemly that a woman pray unto God unveiled?

Paul asks Judge for yourself is right that a woman pray to God unveiled.

1Cor 11:14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a dishonor to him?

Another question what does nature teach us.

1Cor 11:15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.

1. A woman has long hair.
2. It is a Glory to her.
3. Her hair is given as a covering.

Paul is telling these people it’s not right for a women head to be uncovered. Nature tells you that her head should be covered. God in his wisdom has already taken care of it by giving her a covering her hair it's her covering. Does not nature teach us that as Paul shows. Paul is telling us women don't have to wear veils like in the Jewish Tradition.

1Pet 3:1-2 In like manner, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, even if any obey not the word, they may without the word be gained by the behavior of their wives beholding your chaste behavior coupled with fear.

1Pet 3:3 Whose adorning let it not be the outward adorning of braiding the hair, and of wearing jewels of gold, or of putting on apparel;

Peter says let it not be a outward adorning of braided hair, jewels, gold or apparel (Veils).

1Pet 3:4 but let it be the hidden man of the heart, in the incorruptible apparel of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.

Let the adorning be of the incorruptible apparel of a meek and quiet spirit, which in God sight is more costly than Gold. God looks at the heart.

Jesus said of the Pharisee they would strain at a gnat, but then swallow a camel.

In other words, they majored on minor points. They made a big deal about things that really didn't matter.

Women if are reading this and any man thinking about this you don’t have to it. The covering for a women is her hair. Paul tells us this in scripture the very same ones the Devil has tried to use as bondage.


2Cor 3:17-18 Now the Lord is the Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. But we all, with unveiled face beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are transformed into the same image from glory to glory, even as from the Lord the Spirit.

I am glad I got involved in this thread I can know praise God that he is a good and frees us from bondage.

My eyes are know fully open to this false teaching of veiling your women and saying it's God.


_________________
Colin Murray

 2008/2/14 13:30Profile
theopenlife
Member



Joined: 2007/1/30
Posts: 926


 Re:

Docas, I don't know how many times I'll mention this, but... read that article by Nee! :-) He comes from the perspective you mentioned, about why men ought to have their heads uncovered and vice-versa. It gave me a lot to think about. Thank you again for your irenic spirit which has maintained a love for truth. God's grace upon you.

Jim, by the way, I never got around to thanking you for a couple PM's you sent me. They have influenced me in self-denial, which, little by little, I am growing in. Thanks again.

 2008/2/14 13:31Profile
theopenlife
Member



Joined: 2007/1/30
Posts: 926


 Re:

Bubba Guy wrote:

Quote:
How is it possible for women to prophesy with or without a head covering? According to Paul, they can't speak either way.



Calvin corrects you, friend:

"It may seem, however, to be superfluous for Paul to forbid the woman to prophesy with her head uncovered, while elsewhere he wholly prohibits women from speaking in the Church. (1 Timothy 2:12.)It would not, therefore, be allowable for them to prophesy even with a covering upon their head, and hence it follows that it is to no purpose that he argues here as to a covering. It may be replied, that the Apostle, by here condemning the one, does not commend the other. For when he reproves them for prophesying with their head uncovered, he at the same time does not give them permission to prophesy in some other way, but rather delays his condemnation of that vice to another passage, namely in 1 Corinthians 14. In this reply there is nothing amiss, though at the same time it might suit sufficiently well to say, that the Apostle requires women to show their modesty — not merely in a place in which the whole Church is assembled, but also in any more dignified assembly, either of matrons or of men, such as are sometimes convened in private houses."

As well, you wrote,
Quote:
Paul's role was to spread the faith; not to make up rules for worship that Jesus didn't already voice for us. If something Paul says doesn't fit with what Jesus taught, you know who to follow.



My friend, read this please,

Myth #5: Paul is the one who gave this command (rather than God)

This myth attacks directly at the inspiration of Scripture. This myth is often cloaked in terms like: "what Paul was saying was", "Paul was writing to address…" It makes commands in the Bible into doctrines of men. God, not Paul, is the author of 1 Corinthians. Paul was only the secretary, not the author of 1 Corinthians. The Holy Spirit told Paul what to write. Paul did not write on his own authority. "If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord." (1 Corinthians 14:37). There is no basis historically or otherwise to say that Paul gave this command rather than God.

Please don't chip away at the plenary inspiration of the scriptures. :-o Your thoughts?

 2008/2/14 13:37Profile





©2002-2024 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Revival to this Generation.
Privacy Policy