| Poster | Thread |
| | Re: | | Quote:
JFW writes: "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."
Whew... head coverings are: "a definitive test" to whether a woman has the right heart before the Lord...???
Where in scripture does THAT come from???
Are there actually Christians who conclude that if a woman does NOT wear a head covering "her heart is not right before the Lord"??
I know of no other doctrine/teaching like this that sets up men and women to be able to judge other women based on an outward piece of clothing or lack thereof. For this reason, I would have to reject this as anything more than cultural. This would also mean that a women who wears a covering of some sort, is above being "tested" in this way. She is an untouchable, if you will. All she has to do is wear the covering and it proves her heart is right before the Lord. What?? How is that possible?
I knew none of this made good spiritual sense and I just read chapter 2 of "The Magna Carta of Women" by Jessie Penn-Lewis and glad I did. She does not even say it was cultural. I think this is a great explanation and makes a lot of spiritual sense. Our sister deals with why Paul was telling men not to wear headcoverings, too. It talks about Jewish Customs, of wearing headcoverings and why they did and where this practice came from.
http://lighthouselibrary.com/searchdb.php?what=author&searchfor=
Search under P for Penn-Lewis and then select Magna Carta of Women.
A veil or head covering was a sign of guilt and condemnation and a man who wore one was dishonoring his Head (Christ). The wife also, should not dishonor her head (the husband) by wearing a sign of guilt and condemnation.
The Jewish man would veil (wear a tallith) as a sign of reverence and for guilt and condemnation for sin. A Christian man dishonors the Lord by wearing one and a Christian woman dishonors her husband with the same.
Here is a small excerpt, but read the whole chapter as she uses teachings from Dr. Lightfoot and Dr. Bushnell who actually traced this back to its beginnings.
"But why does Paul refer to hair at all? Again we need to understand Jewish customs. Perpetually Paul had to be countering not only the customs but the influence of Judaistic thought upon Christians only gradually emerging into apprehension of the full liberty of the gospel. The Apostle had just said that a woman should have "authority over her own head'' to veil or unveil as she judged best. But the Oral Law had made unveiling so disgraceful a thing that Christian women would find it difficult to put away the veil, even when circumstances were favorable to doing so. The Apostle then meets this difficulty by saying that the woman already had a veil that was a glory to her; her own hair and so she need not be ashamed of uncovering it, whatever the Judaizers might say. Verse 16: "But if any man seemeth to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God."
Here is the conclusion of the passage, and it should be read in the light of all that has preceded it. In effect Paul says: if the women under especially difficult circumstances wish to veil, they are to have'' authority over their head" to do so or not, as they please. But "if any man seemeth to be contentious" about it, let him know that as Christians and as a church we "have no such custom" of veiling.
The summing up of the whole passage is given as follows by Dr. Bushnell. "Paul (1) forbids men to veil (since there is now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus); (2) permits women to veil; but (3) guards against this permission being construed as a command by showing that ideally the woman should unveil before God, man and angels; (4) shows that there is special propriety in women unveiling when addressing God in prayer; (5) declares that (contrary to the teaching of the Jews) there is nothing for a woman to be ashamed of in showing her hair, for it is a 'glory' to her; and (6) disavows veiling as a church custom."
In confirmation of the correctness of this interpretation of the whole passage, Dr. Bushnell remarks that a "little historical evidence... ought to go a long way" in proving that the Apostle did not forbid women unveiling, for it is an undisputed fact in church history (see Dean Alford in comments on 1 Tim. 5:9) that "women sat unveiled in the assemblies in a separate place, by the presbyters," and were ''ordained by the laying on of hands" until the Church Council of Laodicea forbade it in 363 A.D. three hundred years after Paul had written the Epistle to the Corinthians. Dr. Bushnell has much more to say than this on the subject, for she devotes two further lessons to tracing back through church history how the misinterpretation of Paul's true teaching on the veil came into and colored the later versions of the English Bible."
|
|  2015/7/12 22:48 | | JFW
Member
Joined: 2011/10/21
Posts: 2009
Dothan, Alabama
| | Re: | | Dear dspks,
It appears I may not have been clear enough in making this statement, tho if you would notice I said "may be a test" not "is a test" as I was putting forth the idea that perhaps the issues of submission/pride/vanity etc... would/could be tested by the willingness to humble oneself and submit to something of this nature. The test, if it is one, would not be from man but from God. I say this is a possibility because their indeed seems to be contention over this practice in spite of the fact the Apostle goes out of his way to make his point decidedly clear in vs 13-16 in an effort to dispose of, ironically, the debate we seem to be having here.
If you care to, a short word search in a concordance will quickly clear this up, as the word primarily interpreted as "covering" in these passages would be accurately rendered as "veil" and in vs 10 the word translated as "power" is in my concordance referenced as "authority" and in the 4th instance makes specific reference to the authority that a husband has over his wife and the subsequent veil propriety requires her to wear to demonstrate this. Also Brother Greg has provided a wealth of godly instruction from elder saints and leaders throughout the ages to testify to the fact of the matter.
You ask what scriptures does this come from? I submit to you that this has been the issue from the beginning, in the garden and continues unto this day. The issue is submission to authority out of a heart that wants to obey, not one that is coerced- one who obeys because they have already received something they didn't deserve and not because they're trying to get something. The whole of the scriptures confess this from beginning to end and I am submitting for consideration that the "veil/head covering" issue may in fact be a test as to wether a sister has the aforementioned heart. I say "a test" only because there seems to be much resistance to such a small and simple thing and surely no one has put forth a scriptural argument for not wearing one.
So perhaps it'd be better to put it this way,... What are you not willing to do for the Glory of God?
Is Christ the head of all your life except your head/hair?
That would seem a strange thing-
Also I know of no one who would deny fellowship over such a thing (tho it appears Paul might) nor is there any attempt on my part to create a distinct doctrine over such as this and am in no way seeking to "defame" a sister in Christ, tho I am and I understand Greg to be as well, submitting this for our thoughtful consideration as well seek to be completely conformed into the image of Christ.
I can assure you if I were a woman my head would be joyfully covered in service to my King as it is the least I could do:)
I wonder if there were a similar command for men to follow if it would be met with the same resistance? Does anyone here know of a comparable instance where men resist a command and don't by in large practice it?
_________________
Fletcher
|
| | 2015/7/13 0:44 | Profile |
| | Re: | | Quote:
The whole of the scriptures confess this from beginning to end and I am submitting for consideration that the "veil/head covering" issue may in fact be a test as to whether a sister has the aforementioned heart.
A "test" for a sister to see if she has a submissive heart?
Quote:
I say "a test" only because there seems to be much resistance to such a small and simple thing and surely no one has put forth a scriptural argument for not wearing one.
If you give in to one legalism then it will be another and another. Look at the Jessie Penn-Lewis link I gave and you will see a scriptural argument for not wearing one.
Quote:
So perhaps it'd be better to put it this way,... What are you not willing to do for the Glory of God?
There is no glory for God in legality.
Quote:
Is Christ the head of all your life except your head/hair?
Is that a loving and edifying statement?
Quote:
I wonder if there were a similar command for men to follow if it would be met with the same resistance? Does anyone here know of a comparable instance where men resist a command and don't by in large practice it?
As a matter of fact there is. There are some who believe that if you do not obey the 4th commandment you are in sin and I know a lot of brothers who resist such legalism. |
| | 2015/7/13 1:46 | | ccchhhrrriiisss
Member
Joined: 2003/11/23
Posts: 4779
| | Re: | | Hi Greg,
Thank you for your post. I will take some time to read, study, consider and, of course, pray over it.
_________________
Christopher
|
| | 2015/7/13 12:49 | Profile | ginnyrose
Member
Joined: 2004/7/7
Posts: 7534
Mississippi
| | Re: Head Coverings For Women In The Church? | | I have read very few of the postings on this thread because there seems to be no new objection under the sun to this teaching. This means I weary of it.
To those who are new, I wear a head covering at all waking hours. I was taught it from childhood but when I became an adult I wrestled with the issue: I DID NOT want to wear it - I was tired of looking different - I wanted to fit in with the public. And there are a lot of other Christian women out there not wearing it so why do I have to????
I shared this struggle with others who prayed for me and before too long the pressure was off.
After a while I got sick and tired of having to deal with long hair. I made sure when I was combing them that there was no scissors nearby - was afaid that in a moment of weakness I would on impulse cut them. God saw my struggle and in his mercy I experienced a surprise pregnancy where I lost over half of my body hair, including that on my head.
Today I am 68 years old and as I look back I do have a few words of encouragement to those who struggle with this issue.
You do not have to understand all or any of the reasons why scripture enjoins a woman to cover. It does give a few - because of the angels, e.g., but it is not important to know - just be obedient and do it. Let me ask you a question: what would have happened to Abraham if he had debated with God about sacrificing his son Issac? He didn't, but went ahead with the process and God delivered both. This is not an isolated issue: what if all the faithful as noted in the WORD had debated with God? Those that did invited a severe rebuke. What marked a faithful person was one who obeyed with no objections.
Another objection: "What if my husband don't want me to wear it?" Let me ask you one: who are you wearing it for: your husband or God? Your husband cannot ever save you but God can. So one wears it for God's sake.
Faith in God and obedience to Him are inseparable. Just do it.
My testimony.
Sandra Miller
_________________
Sandra Miller
|
| | 2015/7/13 17:57 | Profile | rainydaygirl
Member
Joined: 2008/10/27
Posts: 742
| | Re: | | ginnyrose
over the years i have appreciated your wisdom in many of your posts but sadly i can not agree with this one.i realize your post was not directed at me but i just wanted to respond as one who does not wear a head cover. my husband is the head of my family, and household. as such he has spent much time in prayer and seeking to know the Lord heart on this matter. after much seeking and council he has shared with me that he does not feel convicted nor do others he has spoken with that this is a commend from the Lord. if i were to follow your advice and "just wear it" i would not be submitting to my husband. i would go against him and in a sense saying i do not trust him in this matter. i know my husband loves the Lord dearly and i know he seeks to know what is best for our family so i will continue to honor God and submit to my husband in this matter.
i have no issue with women who chose to follow the convictions they have from the Lord and cover their heads(although i have come to realize there isn't even agreement among those who do cover on when to wear, what kind of cover to wear, and the issue of cutting ones hair).
i said it before i am so thankful that God looks at the heart and not the outward appearance. if my heart is seeking to live unto Him, then in His time He will show me all that i need to follow Him and He will show my husband all that he needs as well. i trust God in that.
thanks for sharing your testimony. i am glad you have found peace in this matter before the Lord and i hope you can be glad for me as well. i have peace in this matter just as you do.
rdg |
| | 2015/7/13 18:40 | Profile | sermonindex
Moderator
Joined: 2002/12/11
Posts: 39795
Canada
Online! | | | 2015/7/14 12:09 | Profile |
| | Re: | | Many have prayed and refuse to follow the private interpiations of those who want to promote this practice. Why is this being pushed so much here?
Does it get you closer to the Lord, will you earn a better place in heaven?
Or is it just so that some men can continue to subjugate women in the name of religion?
|
| | 2015/7/14 13:29 | | narrowpath
Member
Joined: 2005/1/9
Posts: 1522
Germany NRW
| | Re: | | The passage is not only about head covering, it is also about women and men praying or prophesying.
I observed that in recent years public prayer in fellowship seems to be much in decline, let alone prophesying.
It has been a long while since I heard a man or a women prophesying in the name of the Lord in a public meeting.
Very few fellowships I know actually give room for public prayer and virtually no room for prophesy. We have shamefully disregarded this wonderful and precious gift to the church.
Maybe that is worth another thread. |
| | 2015/7/14 15:01 | Profile | brothagary
Member
Joined: 2011/10/23
Posts: 2556
| | Re: | | Yes narrow path, even the definition of prophecy as been turned into just preaching ,which I think is a main problem
|
| | 2015/7/14 15:39 | Profile |
|
