SermonIndex Audio Sermons
SermonIndex - Promoting Revival to this Generation
Give To SermonIndex
Discussion Forum : Revivals And Church History : Head Coverings For Women In The Church?

Print Thread (PDF)

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









 Re:

Quote:
Question: I am aware of the I Corinthians chapter 11 passage about coverings. Are there any other New Testament passages that are used by those who partake of this particular practice?

The reason that I ask is that there are many groups and sects that use a single passage as a mandatory doctrinal truth. Mormons made a doctrine of "baptism for the dead" because of a passage in I Corinthians chapter 15. Other sects and denominations do the same.

Scripture conveys the notion of the testimony of "two or three witnesses" (Deuteronomy 17:6; II Corinthians 13:1) establishing/confirming a matter. When I read the apostles gathering or "council" in Jerusalem after listening to Paul's work with the Gentiles, it makes me wonder if such matters fall under grace (Acts 15:6-11).

Regardless, I haven't found any secondary or supporting passage from the New Testament that might serve to clarify or reinforce this particular practice.



Yes, I too wondered where the 2 or 3 witnesses of Scripture were for such a doctrine.

And, it did not seem important enough to tell the Gentile church about it in Acts 15.

Plus, if you look at a head covering in the Jewish Church, they will take almost a small blanket and cover their entire head when they pray so no one can see it. That is a headcovering!! A little piece of cloth or scarf today, does not cover the head. The head is more than the top of the head, it is the whole head.

And to staff's point, this does not produce unity, either. And does not produce submissiveness.

The reason that many cannot accept this is because only the fruit of the Spirit is a sign of submissiveness to God and husband and I should say, the husband should have the fruit of love towards his wife. An article of clothing proves nothing and ensures nothing. Let's major on the Fruit of the Spirit which is Christ centered and not clothing, and now I see they are marketing stylistic head coverings, turning it into a little cottage industry. But this is not Christ centered, it is man centered. It draws attention to men.

And to Lysa's point about Derek Prince. Great observation and wonderful teacher.

 2015/7/12 8:58
rainydaygirl
Member



Joined: 2008/10/27
Posts: 742


 Re:

julius21

just wanted to say thanks for your posts in this thread. you have brought up many things that have helped further confirm in my mind and heart that God does not require of me to wear a head covering. everytime this topic comes up i spend time in prayer over it and have often walked away feeling confused but i can honestly say i have peace on this matter now.

rdg

 2015/7/12 9:52Profile
narrowpath
Member



Joined: 2005/1/9
Posts: 1522
Germany NRW

 Re:

I wonder if anyone actually listened to or read the messages Greg posted here and then came to the conclusion that it is not for today.

The question came up about 1. Cor 11:10 For this reason the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.

Eve was tempted by Satan the Archangel and was lured into disobedience to the one and only command they had to observe in those days. Please take note that Eve did not receive the command by God directly as Adam did, but she received it from Adam who got it from God. Eve had not been yet been created when the man Adam received the command.

By covering her head she expresses that she chooses submission and obedience to her husband and subsequently to Christ. In effect she proclaims to the angelic world:

"My great-grandmother Eve did not behold the command that Adam passed on to her and the left the authority she was under - but now I and my sisters in Christ express that we are subject to our husbands who is appointed head over us in the governance of God. We chose to keep Gods commands down to small details of which head covering is a visible symbol.

The angelic world witness now the weak point where Satan managed to launch his epic attack on mankind has now been fixed and fortified by obedience.

Watchman Nee gives us wonderful insight into this reality:

http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/neeonheadcovering.htm

How to Cover the Head

“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” (1 Cor. 11:6). In other words, God tells the sisters to be thorough.

No woman can keep her hair and not have her head covered. If she is not covered, she should have her hair either shorn or shaven. If she feels shameful to have her hair shorn or shaven, then she should be covered. Everything must be done thoroughly, not in half measure.

“For a man indeed ought not to have his head veiled, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man” (v. 7). Since man represents the image and glory of God, he should not cover his head. But woman is the glory of man, so she should cover her head. If a woman does not cover her head, she cannot demonstrate that man is the head. “For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man: for neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man” (vv. 8-9). These two verses make it very clear that the matter before us is concerned with government. “For the man is not of the woman”—this is God’s doing. In God’s creation man did not come by woman, but woman from the rib taken out of man. Hence, the head was Adam, not Eve. Furthermore, “neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.” Just by God’s ordering in creation, woman should be in submission to man.

“For this cause ought the woman to have a sign of authority on her head, because of the angels” (v. 10). The Bible does not specify what is to be used for the covering; it only states that the head, where the hair grows, should be covered. Why should the head be covered? Because of the angels.

I often am amazed at this marvelous teaching that the sisters should have on their heads the sign of authority for the sake of the angels. We know the tragic history of how some of the angels sinned. Satan rebelled against God. Why? Because he desired to make himself equal with God. In other words, the angel Lucifer attempted to expose his own head before God and refused to submit to His authority. In Isaiah 14, Satan constantly reiterated, “I will.” “And thou saidst in thy heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God and I will sit upon the mount of the congregation, in the uttermost parts of the north; I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High” (vv. 13-14). Right in this passage we see an archangel falling to become Satan. Revelation 12 further shows us that when Satan fell, one-third of the angelic force fell with him (Rev. 12:4). Why did the angels fall? Because of their not being subject to the authority of God the head but trying instead to expose their own heads

Today woman has a sign of authority on her head because of the angels, that is, as a testimony to the angels. Only the sisters in the church can testify to this, for the women of the world know nothing of it. Today when the sisters have the sign of authority on their heads, they bear the testimony that, “I have covered my head so that I do not have my own head, for I do not seek to be head. My head is veiled and I have accepted man as head, and to accept man as head means that I have accepted Christ as head and God as head. But some of you angels have rebelled against God.” This is what is meant by “because of the angels.”

I have on my head a sign of authority. I am a woman with my head covered. This is a most excellent testimony to the angels, to the fallen and to the unfallen ones. No wonder Satan persistently opposes the matter of head covering. It really puts him to shame. We are doing what he has failed to do. What God did not receive from the angels, He now has from the church. Because some of the angels do not submit themselves to the authority of God and of His Christ, the world is subject to great confusion. The fall of Satan has caused much more trouble than the fall of man. But, thank God, what He failed to get from the fallen angels, He has obtained from the church.

When many of the sisters in the church take the place given to woman and learn to cover their heads, they send out an unspoken word of testimony to the angels in the air, to the effect that God has obtained in the church what He desires. Because of this, woman must have on her head a sign of authority, a testimony to the angels.

 2015/7/12 10:33Profile
narrowpath
Member



Joined: 2005/1/9
Posts: 1522
Germany NRW

 Re:

[by ccchhhrrriiisss on 2015/7/12 9:42:55

Question: I am aware of the I Corinthians chapter 11 passage about coverings. Are there any other New Testament passages that are used by those who partake of this particular practice?

The reason that I ask is that there are many groups and sects that use a single passage as a mandatory doctrinal truth. Mormons made a doctrine of "baptism for the dead" because of a passage in I Corinthians chapter 15. Other sects and denominations do the same.

Scripture conveys the notion of the testimony of "two or three witnesses" (Deuteronomy 17:6; II Corinthians 13:1) establishing/confirming a matter. When I read the apostles gathering or "council" in Jerusalem after listening to Paul's work with the Gentiles, it makes me wonder if such matters fall under grace (Acts 15:6-11).

Regardless, I haven't found any secondary or supporting passage from the New Testament that might serve to clarify or reinforce this particular practice.]


My reply:

The thing is that all the churches of God observed this practice and there was no need to reiterate it. Only in the Corinthian church some objections came up.

See: 1. Cor 11:16 But if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor do the churches of God.

2 or 3 witnesses are needed according to the Mosaic law to establish the guilt or innocence of a person in court, not the validity of scripture.
I wonder who came up with this strange idea to validate scripture with 2 or 3 appearances.

 2015/7/12 10:42Profile









 Re:

Quote:
by narrowpath on 2015/7/12 10:42:44

My reply:

The thing is that all the churches of God observed this practice and there was no need to reiterate it. Only in the Corinthian church some objections came up.

See: 1. Cor 11:16 But if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor do the churches of God.

2 or 3 witnesses are needed according to the Mosaic law to establish the guilt or innocence of a person in court, not the validity of scripture.
I wonder who came up with this strange idea to validate scripture with 2 or 3 appearances.



Are there any other doctrines of legality that are determined by only one passage? And speaking of legality,
why is there such a legality required in the life of a Believer where who is freed from outward laws?

 2015/7/12 12:13
ccchhhrrriiisss
Member



Joined: 2003/11/23
Posts: 4779


 Re:

Hi narrowpath,

Quote:

The thing is that all the churches of God observed this practice and there was no need to reiterate it. Only in the Corinthian church some objections came up.

See: 1. Cor 11:16 But if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor do the churches of God.

2 or 3 witnesses are needed according to the Mosaic law to establish the guilt or innocence of a person in court, not the validity of scripture.
I wonder who came up with this strange idea to validate scripture with 2 or 3 appearances.




I am asking whether the Corinthian passage is the only one in which this topic was ever discussed at any length (even as short as this passage is) in the New Testament. I've researched it, read commentary and, yes, read through history of "hair" traditions. I was just asking (without ulterior motives) whether there are other passages upon which this particular teaching is supported.

As for the notion of "two or three witnesses" applying to Scripture: I don't know if anyone else who "came up" with it, but I see the passage in both the Old and New Testaments (in Deuteronomy 17:6 and II Corinthians 13:1). In the II Corinthians 13:1 passage, Paul wrote about "establishing" a teaching through his presentations of it -- two or three times.

Paul wrote:

Quote:
"This is the third time I am coming to you. Every 'fact is to be confirmed by the testimony of two or three witnesses.' I have previously said when present the second time, and though now absent I say in advance to those who have sinned in the past and to all the rest as well, that if I come again I will not spare anyone, since you are seeking for proof of the Christ who speaks in me, and who is not weak toward you, but mighty in you. For indeed He was crucified because of weakness, yet He lives because of the power of God. For we also are weak in Him, yet we will live with Him because of the power of God directed toward you."

II Corinthians 13:1-4



I am not saying that we need two or three appearances to "validate Scripture," but it is very helpful for two or three passages to clearly establish or confirm a doctrinal teaching.

For me, the I Corinthians 11 passage isn't clear in establishing a doctrine on the matter of women needing to have a man-made covering upon their heads (whether in public, private, prayer or "church" meetings). Let me be clear: If I did see this, I would present it to my wife as well and try to follow the teaching. However, I just don't see it.

I will also add the following:

Someone brought up their "great-grandmother Eve." Interestingly, there is nothing in Scripture to indicate that Eve wore a "head covering" (other than her hair). This was from the time of Creation through the fall -- a time in which angels were certainly present and gender differences were certainly obvious. Secondly, after the fall, the Bible states that God made coats of skins and clothed them. It doesn't mention that the Lord made a physical head covering (in addition to hair) upon Eve's head. This is, of course, prior to the Law of Moses -- a Law that we are now free from.

Referring to history could be helpful in setting a historical precedent. The problem, of course, is that there are other Roman and other pagan traditions, teachings and practices that have found their way into the church throughout history too.

Still, I would like to hear another New Testament passage other than I Corinthians chapter 11 that specifically supplements this teaching or the interpretations of the Corinthian passage. I have studied this off and on (usually because of something that I read on SermonIndex forums), so this would greatly help.


_________________
Christopher

 2015/7/12 12:59Profile
sermonindex
Moderator



Joined: 2002/12/11
Posts: 39795
Canada

Online!
 Re:

Quote:
Are there any other doctrines of legality that are determined by only one passage? And speaking of legality,



Some excellent responses and thoughts saints. Yes I would say Communion is not mentioned in all the epistles and chiefly in 1 Corinthians to correct an abuse of the meaning of the practice as well as headcoverings later on in 1 Corinthians.

Though it is true that Derek Prince did not teaching it much publically, his wife wore a headcovering for every meeting.

Almost 95% or more of all Churches accepted it as a biblical and historical practice until the last 50-100 years. During this time also views on Divorced people being in ministry and pastoral positions has changed also but for all church history there was a keeping of a standard for those who would serve the Lord in this way. I am not saying that God cannot raise up a divorced couple into a leadership position in the Church.

just some thoughts for brethren to consider.

There are many questions answered here that can be helpful: http://www.headcoveringmovement.com/articles-series


_________________
SI Moderator - Greg Gordon

 2015/7/12 13:03Profile
JFW
Member



Joined: 2011/10/21
Posts: 2009
Dothan, Alabama

 Re: Head Coverings For Women In The Church?

Luke 16:10 He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much: and he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much.

Narrowpath- you speak well the truth with the wisdom of humility.

Much like with divorce the resistance to this clear teaching is not an issue of culture so much as it is pride, hard heartedness and a fear of man rather than God as this is indeed humiliating for a modern woman in the midst of a feminized world culture. Tho I submit that this one, seemingly inconsequential, thing may indeed be a definitive test as to wether a woman has the right heart before the Lord regarding her position in His governmental body.
Consider if you will for a moment the testimony of faithfulness that this act of obedience would produce not only to the world and the church at large but also to the husbands of said godly women? I believe it would be devastating to the kingdom of darkness which strangles our lands, because God uses the foolish things of this world to shame the wise...
Also 1 Peter 3 comes to mind when considering this issue;
1 Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives;
2 While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear.
3 Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;
4 But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.
5 For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands:
6 Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.
7 Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.
8 Finally, be ye all of one mind, having compassion one of another, love as brethren, be pitiful, be courteous:
9 Not rendering evil for evil, or railing for railing: but contrariwise blessing; knowing that ye are thereunto called, that ye should inherit a blessing.
10 For he that will love life, and see good days, let him refrain his tongue from evil, and his lips that they speak no guile:
11 Let him eschew evil, and do good; let him seek peace, and ensue it.
12 For the eyes of the Lord are over the righteous, and his ears are open unto their prayers: but the face of the Lord is against them that do evil.
13 And who is he that will harm you, if ye be followers of that which is good?
14 But and if ye suffer for righteousness' sake, happy are ye: and be not afraid of their terror, neither be troubled;
15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:
16 Having a good conscience; that, whereas they speak evil of you, as of evildoers, they may be ashamed that falsely accuse your good conversation in Christ.
17 For it is better, if the will of God be so, that ye suffer for well doing, than for evil doing.

A head covering would certainly be a sign of a meek and quiet spirit, with which the Lord our God can do great and wonderful things:)


_________________
Fletcher

 2015/7/12 15:22Profile
JFW
Member



Joined: 2011/10/21
Posts: 2009
Dothan, Alabama

 Re: Head Coverings For Women In The Church?

A further step forward-
The world tells a woman to be mindful of her rights and to express these by the liberty of her outward appearance and her conduct. Tho the scripture declares that we all, men and women alike, are to crucify ourselves to the world which to do so is an act of obedience actualized by dying daily unto ourselves. Tho if we have and continue to do this an act of devotion will follow that is not commanded but implied by scripture, and this act of devotion will result in us not only crucifying ourselves unto the world but also crucifying the world unto ourselves. Meaning that it will no longer interest us, influence us or make us after its image. Many including myself have crucified themselves unto the world but hadn't crucified it unto ourselves and we were diluted by its influence and lost the effectiveness that comes from being consecrated unto the Lord.
Would not this act of a woman covering her head be an ultimate and final sign to both powers and principalities that she is forever dead to the world, concecrated unto the Lord and therefore alive in Christ?
Is it not written, "love not the world nor the things therein" and in another place, "to be a friend of the world is to be an enemy of God"?
Would this not be a certain issue of divorce on behalf of the soul of the woman to the world that chose to obey and not concern herself with the world or its customs or practices?
For which she would most certainly be reproached by both those inside and outside the church but indeed beloved of God.
So I ask,...what is it in you that resists this, is it the Spirit of God in you that says No! You should'nt do this? Can you with a clear conscience before God confess that is in fact He who reigns in Heaven that tells you that you should not abide by the traditions?
Or if Jesus Himself should attend service at your local congregation would He rebuke you or commend you for this humble act of submission?
In fact, we hope, He is in attendance and has indeed seen the hearts of those who claim His name.
I mean shouldn't we live differently than those who don't know Him and never met Him?
I pray the women who read this see that I'm not picking on you, but defending the faith for which our Savior spilled His blood. It is the world and its prince who attacks you with supposed rights and privileges, tho the Lord has made a way for those who seek it and are wiling to take up their cross and carry it following after Him. Our cross is not what befalls us in this life but what and where we chose to obey even when it costs us, shames us and delivers us up to our enemies for the glory of His name.


_________________
Fletcher

 2015/7/12 16:08Profile
narrowpath
Member



Joined: 2005/1/9
Posts: 1522
Germany NRW

 Re:

Chris:

in 2 Cor 13 it does not talk about doctrine but about establishing the state of those who have sinned and and not repented after Paul's detailed discourse about sin and disorder in the Corinthian church.

Secondly, I am not suggesting that Eve wore a head covering. This would not make sense since the bible says the were naked and not ashamed.

Interestingly, it was after the fall God decreed that the husband shall rule over her.

Bevor the fall, the decree to rule over the wife was not neccessary because Adam and Eve lived in a perfectly harmonious relationship.

Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

The head covering for women and uncovering for men came only into place in the New Testament church. Again, I strongly suggest to check out the links Greg mentioned in the beginning.

 2015/7/12 16:20Profile





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