Let me put this thread in a different light.

Lets consider the ministry of David Wilkerson and Carter Conlon and the Times Square Church. Are these men in error and rebellion because their wives don't put on the head covering?

We can practically pull out hundreds of "godly" ministries that are out there and most would not have this set in stone, would anyone say that these ministries are in rebellion?

Now don't reply by saying, "I am not their judge", because thats a cop out. There has been enough bickering and judging in this thread to make a fair assessment of these ministries.

Picture yourself standing before Carter and his wife Theresa and tell them that they are in rebellion because the women are not wearing the head covering.

I can imagine their reply. They would look at you with compassion and say nothing. They would just stand there and look at you with compassion in their eyes while you would begin to melt under the conviction power of the holy Ghost.

Compliments,

your emotional scenarios do not change scripture... I am a bit suprised to see you take this avenue.

1Cor 11:6 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.

Simple enough very easy to understand a woman should have her head covered.

The word covered here comes from The Strong’s Greek number 2619. katakalupto to cover wholly, i.e. veil:--cover, hide

Looking at the word in the strong’s Concordance it agrees a woman head is covered Wholly.

1Cor 11:7-9 For a man indeed ought not to cover [his] head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.

1Cor 11:10 For this cause ought the woman to have power on [her] head because of the angels.

I had to mention these words [b]power on her head[/b] she needs power on her head because of the Angels. So I did a search to see what it meant. I like the words they use in Strongs token of control, authority, jurisdiction, liberty, power, right and strength truly God wants something special on a woman’s head.

1849. exousia ex-oo-see'-ah from 1832 in the sense of ability; privilege, i.e. (subjectively) force, capacity, competency, freedom, or objectively mastery concretely, magistrate, superhuman, potentate, token of control, delegated influence:--authority, jurisdiction, liberty, power, right, strength

1850. exousiazo ex-oo-see-ad'-zo from 1849; to control:--exercise authority upon, bring under the (have) power of

1Cor 11: 11-12 Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord. For as the woman [is] of the man, even so [is] the man also by the woman; but all things of God.

1Cor 11: 13 Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?

So should a woman’s head be uncovered. Not if she can get all those benefits above. I would say cover her head.

1Cor 11: 13 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?

Yes Paul I agree with you.

1Cor 11: 14 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for [her] hair is given her for a covering.

The word hair comes from the following Strongs numbers 4018 and 4016. They use the word mantle, veil, covering and vesture
.
4018. neuter of a presumed derivative of 4016; something thrown around one, i.e. a mantle, veil:--covering, vesture

4016. to throw all around, i.e. invest (with a palisade or with clothing):--array, cast about, clothe(-d me), put on.

It is very easy for me to understand. A woman’s hair is her mantle it’s her veil, it’s her covering and it gives her a token of control, authority, jurisdiction, liberty, power, right and strength.

_________________
Colin Murray

This will be my last post on here.

If I have offended anyone by posting things I should not have posted I am sorry please forgive me.

Paul tells that our fight is not with flesh and blood. But against Spiritual forces.

I have enjoyed digging into my bible and looking through the scrptures I cannot get away from my last post that is what I believe.

Once again you will see in the future a different man posting in the future no matter how hot things get.

Jim I would say to you, I love you, I hope you can find it your heart to love me after our heated moments while posting.

_________________
Colin Murray

Dear Colin,

I forgive you, too. Praise God for giving you a tender conscience.

By the way, just yesterday the Holy Spirit convicted me to go to someone and ask for forgiveness for acting in presumption. I did receive forgiveness.
I also had to go to 3 brothers and tell them about it because they were there when I acted wrongly.


Philip

At the end of the day we are Brothers and Sisters. Together we can cry Abba.

Your will be done your Kingdom come on Earth as it is in Heaven.

Together we shall see all of Gods people,
moving in all of Gods Power, Reaping all of Gods Harvest, in all Gods of World.

_________________
Colin Murray

Hello, I read a few of the posts on this not all of them. However I would like to add my two cents worth.
Krisp mentioned legalism and also about if Spurgeon departs from scripture krisp will go with script.
Concerning legalism, this is a label or buzz word that once someone gets labeled with it thats almost "it" as far as being considered on other subjects.

Also, MOST American christians judge people who where the headcovering as underbondage or legalist. Mennonites etc. get the label for it very quickly by those who are "free" in Christ.
I believe that head covering is scriptural however because of the devisive teaching on it and the stigma of legalism attached to it I would not push the you need to have your head covered while praying. On this as krisp said all things charity.
Concerning Spurgeon or any of these guys and the I'll go with scripture comment.
I say this statement as well. However I recognize that "I" do not necesarly know what all scripture fully says about certain topics.
So I would urge caution about this statement as well. Especially since people say the same about me, John got right here but not here so i go with scripture. First I say amen go with scripture over my error! but again be sure you aren't following your own error as well. out of the frying pan into the fire if you will.
Sorry if I am now rambling. Also please don't think I'm sharpshooting you krisp I do appreciate your spirit and wisdom.
God bless, John

jimdeid2sin said: