Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 2, 2019 13:36:29 GMT -5
I shall try my best to bring up one small detail that shouldn’t be too explosive. For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.Having power on your head is not the same as having a sign of weakness on your head. KJV is one of the very few translations that gets this detail right. The word for power in this sentence means self-originated power. Never, not in Scripture nor in secular Greek nor any place else, did that word have a different meaning, and it certainly never described a cloth veil. But how can self-originated power be a sign of submission to men? To the seminary thinker relying on hermes ( ) this looks like a major contradiction, so they translate power into an incorrect watered-down word for someone else’s authority. Then they randomly apply it to a cloth veil as if veils appeared anywhere in this passage or as if supernatural angels are taken back by a piece of cotton. Who knew it was that easy to change an angel’s mind? The woman is the glory of man, and long hair is given as her glory. It’s one of the things that makes a woman naturally beautiful. A woman has her own natural supply of self-originating glory that grows from her head. It’s one of the things God gave to her to express her inner glory. And guess what? There’s a huge theme in the OT of hair linked to power. Samson anyone? Women are the ones who most naturally carry this sign of power as their God-given right. Please understand me. I’m not dismissing the chain of command. This is not about women having power apart from men. This means precisely that women who follow the natural pattern and show themselves as the glory of man will have power in the spirit realm that other women don’t have, which gets a response from angels. This is why women tend to be gifted at intercessory prayer. We are helpmeet for man in the natural and the spiritual. The OT invested a lot into revealing this. Long hair as a source of power was well known to Jews. Women looking better in long hair was well known to all the human race. Put 2 and 2 together. If someone wants to oppose this, well I’m sorry but there’s no other precedent to appeal to. That’s what Paul meant. PS: This is why Paul connected it to praying and prophesying. Spiritual warfare. This instructs women on why God anoints them to prophesy. Okay that’s all for now. Again, I’m not trying to oppose Giller, only to offer my view. Receive it if you will, reject it if you won’t. I have a job today so I can’t debate this much. Thanks for sharing this, PG4Him I agree about the significance of hair in the bible.....Nazarite vow, like Samson...and God counting the hair on our heads....and not an hair on our head will perish....it all means something. I'm going to let what you are saying percolate for a while. I do still believe we should not underestimate the power and significance of signs though, such as head covering. For example, words have power and words are just signs/symbols for the thoughts they are conveying. Eg, the word for "house" is not an actual house, but is a symbol/sign for the idea of a house. Water baptism has power and is only an outward sign of an inward reality.
|
|
|
Post by 2fw8212a on May 2, 2019 13:54:03 GMT -5
Water baptism has power and is only an outward sign of an inward reality. Or of something yet to come...
"For we know in part and we prophesy in part." - 1 Corinthians 13:9
|
|
PG4Him
Senior Member
Essay Moderator
Posts: 3,570
|
Post by PG4Him on May 2, 2019 14:05:56 GMT -5
External signs are valuable when they come from within us. The words we speak, for example, are bubbling up from the abundance of our heart. Baptism is an intentional action to lay down the body as if being buried. Long hair grows out of us naturally; it isn’t a decoration we have to put on. If a woman feels led to use a veil as an expression of this, that’s fine. But the anointing comes from her intention, not from the type of fabric. Today we have lots of wacky theories going around that cotton is to angels what lead is to Superman, somehow confounding them so they can’t read your thoughts or attack you in prayer. That is pure superstition.
|
|
|
Post by frienduff on May 2, 2019 14:07:51 GMT -5
I’m waiting to see how this discussion unfolds. I tend to be the one who dokei philoneikos in doctrinal debates around here, so I will let others have their say. OH , sister candance , You know we love you . You just put those hands up dear sister and let out a shout of praise to the LORD .
|
|
|
Post by frienduff on May 2, 2019 14:11:20 GMT -5
One simple question please... How long is " long " ? Well, hopefully longer than mine . I usually cut mine very short , a number ONE all over , sometimes a two or even if I feel real frisky a number four . Ps , if it makes anyone feel any better , OL FRIENDUFF GOT NO PLANS to grow my hair out and braid it etc . NOPE . Sister you are dearly loved . So throw those hands up and just praise the LORD .
|
|
|
Post by frienduff on May 2, 2019 14:14:51 GMT -5
Joh 18:39 (39) But ye have a custom, that I should release unto you one at the passover: will ye therefore that I release unto you the King of the Jews? Well the word custom for this verse, is the same Greek word for custom as Corinthians. And here it is referring to a practice, or tradition that they had of releasing someone on the passover, which does not refer to a type of attitude at all. you AND letters are both right . a custom can be a desire . BUT you have a DESIRE that I release one unto you . A custom comes from a desire . So you and letters are right .
|
|
|
Post by frienduff on May 2, 2019 14:18:35 GMT -5
I shall try my best to bring up one small detail that shouldn’t be too explosive. For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.Having power on your head is not the same as having a sign of weakness on your head. KJV is one of the very few translations that gets this detail right. The word for power in this sentence means self-originated power. Never, not in Scripture nor in secular Greek nor any place else, did that word have a different meaning, and it certainly never described a cloth veil. But how can self-originated power be a sign of submission to men? To the seminary thinker relying on hermes ( ) this looks like a major contradiction, so they translate power into an incorrect watered-down word for someone else’s authority. Then they randomly apply it to a cloth veil as if veils appeared anywhere in this passage or as if supernatural angels are taken back by a piece of cotton. Who knew it was that easy to change an angel’s mind? The woman is the glory of man, and long hair is given as her glory. It’s one of the things that makes a woman naturally beautiful. A woman has her own natural supply of self-originating glory that grows from her head. It’s one of the things God gave to her to express her inner glory. And guess what? There’s a huge theme in the OT of hair linked to power. Samson anyone? Women are the ones who most naturally carry this sign of power as their God-given right. Please understand me. I’m not dismissing the chain of command. This is not about women having power apart from men. This means precisely that women who follow the natural pattern and show themselves as the glory of man will have power in the spirit realm that other women don’t have, which gets a response from angels. This is why women tend to be gifted at intercessory prayer. We are helpmeet for man in the natural and the spiritual. The OT invested a lot into revealing this. Long hair as a source of power was well known to Jews. Women looking better in long hair was well known to all the human race. Put 2 and 2 together. If someone wants to oppose this, well I’m sorry but there’s no other precedent to appeal to. That’s what Paul meant. PS: This is why Paul connected it to praying and prophesying. Spiritual warfare. This instructs women on why God anoints them to prophesy. Okay that’s all for now. Again, I’m not trying to oppose Giller, only to offer my view. Receive it if you will, reject it if you won’t. I have a job today so I can’t debate this much. Thanks for sharing this, PG4Him I agree about the significance of hair in the bible.....Nazarite vow, like Samson...and God counting the hair on our heads....and not an hair on our head will perish....it all means something. I'm going to let what you are saying percolate for a while. I do still believe we should not underestimate the power and significance of signs though, such as head covering. For example, words have power and words are just signs/symbols for the thoughts they are conveying. Eg, the word for "house" is not an actual house, but is a symbol/sign for the idea of a house. Water baptism has power and is only an outward sign of an inward reality. Speaking of sampsons hair , it was an outward covering of a deeper meaning too . It represented the power . Anyone ever notice it had it in SEVEN LONG STRANDS . its like a shadow of something greater at work . The SEVEN EYES , the SEVEN SPIRITS . it all represents the HOLY GHOST . SAMPSONS POWER came FROM GOD . As we all know . I just found it such a wonderous thing that it was in SEVEN LONG BRAIDS . And we hear mention of the seven spirits of GOD WHICH in truth are the ONE SAME SPIRIT .
|
|
|
Post by Giller on May 2, 2019 23:46:17 GMT -5
1Co 11:16 (16) But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.
Now in this phrase, we can see a kind of condition to it.
It says "if", that is the condition, "if" any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom.
But what if we were to reverse engineer this phrase, you would get something like this, if any man is not contentious, then we have such a custom.
It would be in essence allowing the custom, which with this condition, it tells us that the custom is not within the attitude of being contentious, but rather within a practice they were holding on to.
1Co 11:4-5 (4) Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. (5) But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.
1Co 11:13-15 (13) Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered? (14) Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? (15) But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.
We know that God does not want us to dishonor our head, which for man is Christ, and for woman is man, and then it associates this covering, uncovering business with hair.
Short hair for man, long hair for women.
So obviously the custom does not refer to hair.
1Co 11:6 (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.
Since it is associating the covering with long hair, the part that says if the woman be not covered, refers to her having short hair, and if she has short hair, let her be shorn, but if it is a shame for her to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered, that is in this case vailed.
Now we get to our verse:
1Co 11:16
(16) But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.
I can totally see woman in the Corinthian church, becoming contentious in having to shear or shave their heads, or in having to wear a veil, and I can see even men getting angry about their wives having to be shorn or shaven, or having to wear a veil.
Now the question I have is this, now we know that God would want man and woman to honour their head, through short hair and long hair, but what about this shorn and shaven, and being veiled stuff, is that a necessity to obey today?
In essence Paul was saying, if someone is contentious towards this custom, then do not squabble about it, it is not a necessity, do not squabble over unnecessary things.
Now honoring Christ is necessary, but is having your head shaven or shorn, or being veiled necessary?
|
|
Cletus
Senior Member
Posts: 2,517
|
Post by Cletus on May 3, 2019 0:10:09 GMT -5
External signs are valuable when they come from within us. The words we speak, for example, are bubbling up from the abundance of our heart. Baptism is an intentional action to lay down the body as if being buried. Long hair grows out of us naturally; it isn’t a decoration we have to put on. If a woman feels led to use a veil as an expression of this, that’s fine. But the anointing comes from her intention, not from the type of fabric. Today we have lots of wacky theories going around that cotton is to angels what lead is to Superman, somehow confounding them so they can’t read your thoughts or attack you in prayer. That is pure superstition. not to be... contentious... but lead bounces off super man. I think you are looking for "kryptonite"
I was a big fan of super man as a little boy. I even had the pajamas with a removable superman cape.
what are your thoughts on tin foil hats?... LOLZ... they do have some strange ideas.
|
|
PG4Him
Senior Member
Essay Moderator
Posts: 3,570
|
Post by PG4Him on May 3, 2019 6:20:04 GMT -5
He can’t see through lead. That’s what I was going for. Same idea with tin foil hats so the aliens can’t read your mind.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2019 6:51:28 GMT -5
External signs are valuable when they come from within us. The words we speak, for example, are bubbling up from the abundance of our heart. Baptism is an intentional action to lay down the body as if being buried. Long hair grows out of us naturally; it isn’t a decoration we have to put on. If a woman feels led to use a veil as an expression of this, that’s fine. But the anointing comes from her intention, not from the type of fabric. Today we have lots of wacky theories going around that cotton is to angels what lead is to Superman, somehow confounding them so they can’t read your thoughts or attack you in prayer. That is pure superstition. Signs in the natural realm have POWER when they are ordained by God.....He doesn't ordain them for no reason. That some people form wacky or just plain fleshly theories out of things in God's word is no reason that we should repudiate or ignore His word. The devil is all the time trying to discredit or distort the things that God has said.
|
|
PG4Him
Senior Member
Essay Moderator
Posts: 3,570
|
Post by PG4Him on May 3, 2019 7:34:07 GMT -5
External signs are valuable when they come from within us. The words we speak, for example, are bubbling up from the abundance of our heart. Baptism is an intentional action to lay down the body as if being buried. Long hair grows out of us naturally; it isn’t a decoration we have to put on. If a woman feels led to use a veil as an expression of this, that’s fine. But the anointing comes from her intention, not from the type of fabric. Today we have lots of wacky theories going around that cotton is to angels what lead is to Superman, somehow confounding them so they can’t read your thoughts or attack you in prayer. That is pure superstition. Signs in the natural realm have POWER when they are ordained by God.....He doesn't ordain them for no reason. That some people form wacky or just plain fleshly theories out of things in God's word is no reason that we should repudiate or ignore His word. The devil is all the time trying to discredit or distort the things that God has said. Where am I repudiating God’s word? I’ve been here advocating the loudest for spiritual power ordained by God. I simply don’t believe that careless women living in sin can slap on a scarf to keep the angels in line while they pray. I don’t believe in magic wands. How can a woman, for example (not speaking of you, just a hypothetical woman), reject the whole premise of this passage about man as the head of woman, go around teaching feminist views, and then appeal to this passage for protection while she prays? A man fell down dead when he touched the ark. These natural signs are not playthings. We can’t separate this head cover thing from Paul’s overall point about woman as the glory of man. If a woman rejects that, she’s wasting her time with a veil. At best she’s wasting her time; at worst she could be punished for manipulating God’s power. Why I am repudiating God’s word to point this out??
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2019 9:27:11 GMT -5
Signs in the natural realm have POWER when they are ordained by God.....He doesn't ordain them for no reason. That some people form wacky or just plain fleshly theories out of things in God's word is no reason that we should repudiate or ignore His word. The devil is all the time trying to discredit or distort the things that God has said. Where am I repudiating God’s word? I’ve been here advocating the loudest for spiritual power ordained by God. I simply don’t believe that careless women living in sin can slap on a scarf to keep the angels in line while they pray. I don’t believe in magic wands. How can a woman, for example (not speaking of you, just a hypothetical woman), reject the whole premise of this passage about man as the head of woman, go around teaching feminist views, and then appeal to this passage for protection while she prays? A man fell down dead when he touched the ark. These natural signs are not playthings. We can’t separate this head cover thing from Paul’s overall point about woman as the glory of man. If a woman rejects that, she’s wasting her time with a veil. At best she’s wasting her time; at worst she could be punished for manipulating God’s power. Why I am repudiating God’s word to point this out?? I wasn't shouting, only emphasizing the word "POWER". Would you mind clarifying something for me? I thought you were implying that a physical head covering over head/hair is not necessary....because earlier you had hinted you were going to bring something controversial....or have I misunderstood and you are only addressing the hypocrisy of wearing a head covering without any inner reality of what a covering signifies?
|
|
PG4Him
Senior Member
Essay Moderator
Posts: 3,570
|
Post by PG4Him on May 3, 2019 9:59:48 GMT -5
Would you mind clarifying something for me? I thought you were implying that a physical head covering over head/hair is not necessary....because earlier you had hinted you were going to bring something controversial....or have I misunderstood and you are only addressing the hypocrisy of wearing a head covering without any inner reality of what a covering signifies? I haven’t mentioned anything here that I thought was controversial. Truly, I didn’t expect it to be radical to say a veil is not a magic wand. My more radical thoughts about this passage are not related to the cover itself. Since the object of the cover has become the focus of this thread, I’m trying to stay on that. As for the object of the cover, I agree with John and Giller that long hair is the cover. Paul never said the word veil in this entire chapter. There is no OT precedent that veils represent submission (or power). Veils represented privacy or secrecy. Comparing Scripture with Scripture, it makes no sense that a veil relates to woman as the glory of man. Why did Paul go to long hair (which was a source of power in Scripture) instead of saying he really meant a veil? Not to mention that veils in the OT covered most of a woman’s body, not just her head. Women in Scripture used veils to hide their faces. How can we hijack that custom to make it a scarf around your hair and call it the glory of man??
|
|
|
Post by Giller on May 3, 2019 10:26:24 GMT -5
Good stuff PG4HIM.
Like it.
I think only one verse can be implied as some type of covering, otherwise none can.
1Co 11:6 (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.
If the woman is not covered, that means if she is not covered with long hair, which means she has short hair.
And if that is the case, it says let her be, which is an action word, that is let her be shorn or shaven, and if it be a shame for her to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.
We know that a woman cannot grow hair just like that, so the covering here has to be a type of veil of some kind, and this veil was not for the woman to have power on her head, but rather to hide her short hair.
But I have to ask the question, which has not been answered, is having your head shaven or shorn, or being veiled still necessary today, or was it an unnecessary custom?
|
|