| Poster | Thread |
narrowpath
Member
Joined: 2005/1/9
Posts: 1522
Germany NRW
| | Re: | |
May I suggest everyone to listen to Zac Poonen's Bible study first to see where I/he is coming from.
He really explains it well.
I am either right or wrong, I do not think this truth is up to our own conscience such as drinking wine, eating meet or keeping certains days.
Thanks,
Philip
|
|
 2008/2/11 12:47 | Profile |
| | Re: We need to cover head covering | | "But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for [her] hair is given her for a covering."
I don't get this. Paul's comments say that a woman's hair IS her covering and that it is a shame only if her head is shorn and uncovered.
no place does it say that a woman who has hair on her head should be covered.
bub
|
|
| 2008/2/11 12:56 | |
davym
Member
Joined: 2007/5/22
Posts: 326
| | Re: | | Quote:
"But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for [her] hair is given her for a covering.
I don't get this. Paul's comments say that a woman's hair IS her covering and that it is a shame only if her head is shorn and uncovered.
"
Following your rationale, verse 4 of 1 Cor 11 states
[i]4Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.
[/i]
This would mean a man would have to have his head shaven to pray. ???
_________________
David
|
|
| 2008/2/11 13:31 | Profile |
mission101
Member
Joined: 2007/8/23
Posts: 9
Wellman, Iowa
| | Re: | | So does this mean that everything that is not agreed upon by all Christianity is Legalism??
I do believe the doctrin of the head covering is in scripture. It is an outward sign of an inward submission to authority. It is based in 1 Corinthians 11. One thing that really spoke to me is that if you were to try and replace the word covering with another word such as hair or husband or father of a daughter the verses don't make any sense!
I am wondering...Have you ever taken the time to examine a subject from someone else's point of view; or will those of us who are labeled as Legalists always be trodden down for believing things that are vague to the greater part of Christendom??
One last thought, the man is the head of the woman and she is the glory of man... wouldn't we want the glory of man to covered?
_________________
Seth Kauffman
|
|
| 2008/2/11 13:36 | Profile |
| | Re: | | Quote:
So does this mean that everything that is not agreed upon by all Christianity is Legalism??
No, thats not what I said at all... it becomes legalism when we take something such as head coverings and make that the focus and the measure by which we judge spirituality.
There is nothing wrong with a woman wearing a head covering, especially if she is doing so out of pure heart toward the Lord and her husband.
But many times it becomes a stumbling block because those who do wear head coverings can sometimes begin to look down upon those who do not.
And the same can happen for those who dont wear them.
The focus and measure of our spirituality... of our faith... is Jesus.
Period.
Anything else is an idol.
Quote:
I do believe the doctrin of the head covering is in scripture. It is an outward sign of an inward submission to authority.
... and in the OT that was all part of what the Old Covenant was about. Head coverings, circumcism, etc etc. It was all symbolic outward type stuff. And didnt Jesus come against that stuff IF there was nothing inside?
Jesus called the pharisees "white washed tombs"... beautiful on the outside but filled with dead mens' bones. In otherwards, Jesus wasnt interested in what the outside looked like, He wanted to know what the INSIDE looked like.
I know women who wear head coverings, and for the most part they seem spiritual and submissive and sweet... and I'm sure they really are. HOWEVER, I've known a few that I wouldnt give you 2 cents for. (Not that I'm in the business of buying women! You know what I mean tho...)
On the outside they have all the signs and symbols of submission and spirituality... but on the inside they stink.
Kinda like when I make my 4 yr old son sit down at the dinner table instead of standing in his chair. He may be sitting on the outside... but I can tell by his face he's still standing on the inside.
Jesus did away with all that outward junk. I'm not talking about dressing modestly and humbly. Scripture does have a lot to say about those things. But we dont have to wear special head coverings and what not in order to be in a right relationship with God.
You certainly wouldnt demand that a 35 yr old man who just saved to go get a circumcism, would you? That was an outward sign just like a head covering is. Well, why then would you insist that Christian women need to wear a head covering?
Besides, there is no way you can get from scripture that a NT woman is to wear head coverings. Paul is very plain about the whole issue, and Bubba nailed it. Go back and read his post.
Now, as said before... I'm NOT against head coverings. It's none of my business if someone other than my wife wants to wear one. But you can not demand that of others.
Quote:
May I suggest everyone to listen to Zac Poonen's Bible study first to see where I/he is coming from.
He really explains it well.
As for hearing Poonen's discussion about it... I respect the man, but I couldnt care less what he has to say on the subject. I care about what scripture says. And I would love to hear [b]YOUR[/b] thoughts and impressions about it instead... since you're hear and you're who we are talking to.
Rather than bring this topic to the forefront of the forum, and then defer to Poonen when we have questions we want to ask of you, why not just tell us what [b]YOU[/b] think?
Krispy |
|
| 2008/2/11 13:45 | |
| | Re: | | Quote:
I am wondering...Have you ever taken the time to examine a subject from someone else's point of view; or will those of us who are labeled as Legalists always be trodden down for believing things that are vague to the greater part of Christendom??
I see you're new. Welcome to SI! Glad you're here.
Before you begin to label everyone and condemn us for things we havent done or said, I would recommend you avail yourself of the literally THOUSANDS of different discussions that we have all had with each other over the [b]years[/b].
You're welcome to join in, and I'm looking forward to talking to you... but dont start out this way, my friend. You dont know any of us yet. At least give us time to make you hate us! :-) (kidding of course)
And it might surprise you to know that I have been labeled a legalist as well... and I've been labeled the opposite of a legalist. I guess its all in the eye of the beholder... kinda like a log.
Krispy |
|
| 2008/2/11 14:00 | |
| | Re: | | In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all things love.
Head coverings is hardly an essential, my brothers and sisters.
Krispy |
|
| 2008/2/11 14:13 | |
mission101
Member
Joined: 2007/8/23
Posts: 9
Wellman, Iowa
| | Re: | | Well I agree with your statments about taking doctrins and using them to make ourselves look more spiritual than others. We should only look at each person as being in Christ. Like if you were to draw a big circle and put the God's perfect will as a dot in the center everybody in that circle could be considered in Christ. some might be on the left and some on the right but we are all IN CHRIST.
I'm sure it looks to the rest of the SI community that I'm starting off in a very bold condemning way...IT was not meant that way at all and if anyone out there is scared to death of my first post don't be... I just thought I'd join in the fray so to speak. It will take some knocking around before I learn how to say things and how not to. A little toe stepping on from each of us is good. I really should do this the formal way and hopefully I will get to before I do to much more posting.
~ The new kid on the block
_________________
Seth Kauffman
|
|
| 2008/2/11 14:23 | Profile |
davym
Member
Joined: 2007/5/22
Posts: 326
| | Re: | | Quote:
Head coverings is hardly an essential, my brothers and sisters.
OK, but it is pleasing to our Lord and Saviour because it reflects headship. If this is ignored then the outward expression is that we are ignoring headship which is rebellion against God in our hearts and this is serious and can't be written off as a non-essential!
_________________
David
|
|
| 2008/2/11 14:26 | Profile |
| | Re: | | Quote:
I'm sure it looks to the rest of the SI community that I'm starting off in a very bold condemning way...IT was not meant that way at all and if anyone out there is scared to death of my first post don't be... I just thought I'd join in the fray so to speak. It will take some knocking around before I learn how to say things and how not to. A little toe stepping on from each of us is good. I really should do this the formal way and hopefully I will get to before I do to much more posting.
Mission, dont sweat it! Your post wasnt that bad... I just wanted to make sure we're on the same page!
Like I said, I'm glad you're hear, and trust me... my mouth knows the taste of my foot quite well, and I hardly think you'll come close to saying the wrong thing at the wrong time like I have! lol...
Welcome!
Krispy |
|
| 2008/2/11 14:31 | |
