Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2019 14:20:06 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?? okay, thank you for clarifying. I do respectfully disagree with that position then. I have had trouble understanding those verses, but I believe now it is starting to come more clear that the reason Paul related a head covering to a woman's hair is that he is making a comparison between the two........saying that if it is a shame for a woman to have her head shorn (as it was a shame in those days...it signified a prostitute or wanton woman), then it is likewise, in similar fashion, a shame for her not to have her head covered with a covering in Christian assembly. That's how I'm reading it now. (And since those scriptures only talk about covering the head, not face or body, then I believe that's all we need to be concerned with...apart from the sensible instructions about modesty overall.)
|
|
|
Post by Giller on May 3, 2019 23:49:54 GMT -5
But to the one's who believe that if a woman has short hair, that they should maybe have a veil or have a hair extension covering, until their hair grows back long, do you think that this can be considered their covering temporarily until they grow there hair long? Or does the blood cover it, until they grow their hair long? But what if they choose the option of being shaven? Can a woman prophesy in a bikini if she just repented five minutes ago? Can a drunk man prophesy while he’s still intoxicated if he repented five minutes ago? The blood can cover our sin unto forgiveness, but there’s something to be said for presenting a clean vessel. I do know what you are saying, but the only thing a person can do for forgiveness of sin is repent. And hair takes time to grow, so are you saying as long as she has short hair she cannot prophesy? When a woman has short hair she is not intoxicated and so on. And if their heart is right with God in that moment in time, who are you to say they cannot be used of God? And what about someone with a tattoo, and we know tattoos are not of God, but if someone repents, and gets saved, we know that a tattoo is hard to remove from the skin, and even cost a lot to get removed, but believe it or not, God can use a new born Christian in the Lord to prophesy, even ones with tattoos. And yes a drunk man may have repented, and needs to get out of that intoxication, and yes God wants to use a clean vessel. But also God can set a man free from that intoxication instantly as well, which is not always the case, but he can do it.
|
|
|
Post by Giller on May 4, 2019 0:24:09 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 I myself at one time use to say that the custom referred to here was pointing to being contentious.
To me it never made sense, but nevertheless I use to see it that way, at one time.
Now if there were no customs mentioned in the scriptures before verse 16, then I would admit, that I have no grounds to stand on.
But there is a custom or practice mentioned.
And is that a coincidence? Well obviously not, for with God there is no coincidence.
Here of course is that custom:
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.
In this verse the focus is on a woman who is not covered with long hair, which means she has short hair.
That is the object of focus.
The object of focus is not on a woman who has long hair, which is the way God wants women to be, in this verse, but on women who have short hair, which is not the way God wants women to be.
Contentions
Now what I want to focus on is how does Paul deal with the word contention or similar words to that effect, in other verses?
Well let us mention some of them:
Php 1:15-17 (15) Some indeed preach Christ even of envy and strife; and some also of good will: (16) The one preach Christ of contention, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my bonds: (17) But the other of love, knowing that I am set for the defence of the gospel.
Tit 3:9 (9) But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.
1Co 1:11 (11) For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.
Rom 2:8 (8) But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,
We can see that the word contention and so forth is mentioned in many ways, and Paul corrected it in many different ways, depending on circumstance.
And in one case he was made aware of certain contentions among the Corinthian church.
But in none of these examples, was the word contention etc, mentioned as being a custom, why?
And why is there an actually custom mentioned in our Corinthian verses?
Hmmm!!!
|
|
|
Post by Giller on May 4, 2019 0:32:57 GMT -5
Yes God wants to use a sanctified vessel, and of course he wants people to come out of their intoxication, and just because you repent does not mean you are automatically out of your intoxication, but at the same time, that does not mean that God is not able to do so, instantly.
|
|
|
Post by Giller on May 4, 2019 1:33:24 GMT -5
Shorn/Shaven/covered
1Co 11:5-6 (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. (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.
Is it right for women to dishonor their head? No.
And if they pray and prophesy, with their head uncovered with long hair (which means they have short hair), they dishonor their head.
Now it was mentioned by brother Cletus that their was some type of veil custom back in the day, which he got this information from John Gill, and thanks for that info Cletus.
But concerning the issue of verse 6, it mentions 2 options for the woman who has short hair, that she either be shorn or shaven, or that she be covered.
Now none of these 2 options, is an option of being covered with actual long hair.
And there may have been a veil custom at the time, which the Greeks may have brought about, but in the case of the Corinthians, I do not believe that they got their custom from the Greeks, because there seems to be a lot of meaning to this particular custom.
And this custom was not a sinful custom at all, for Paul would not have mentioned it, in the way that he did, if it were so.
And because of historical info, which shows veils being used at this time, and mainly because the bible mentions veils at various different times (mainly old testament), and because of the context of this verse, to me it appears more than likely that being covered here does refer to a veil.
1Co 11:5-6 (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. (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.
To me it seems more likely that this custom, came to be, by the Corinthian church itself, it seems to be a custom they had formed.
And look at what it says in verse 5:"for that is even all one as if she were shaven", so it seems that some of the Corinthian church in some form or way, may have already known that in God's sight, there was no difference between a woman with short hair, and a woman who was shaven or bald.
And it seems that in verse 6, some of that meaning came into play.
And in verse 6, it shows for the woman with short hair, to be shorn or shaven, why? So to reprove shame, because in God's eyes there was no difference between a woman with short hair, and a bald woman, so for her to be bald would reprove shame to the fullest, so she can see what it is to God in it's fullest, so she can feel that shame.
But if it be a shame for her to do so, that is be shorn or shaven, then you go to option 2, which is for her to be covered.
So considering the issue of reproving shame, I believe that option 2, has a similar purpose, but rather than reproving shame, it is for the purpose of hiding one's shame, or hiding one's short hair.
Now some may say it refers to a wig or hair extensions, but is there any examples of this in the bible? I do not recall ever reading one, but if there is one, by all means post it.
So the custom of reproving or hiding shame, does not enable a woman to have long hair.
Now we go to verse 10:
1Co 11:10 (10) For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.
Now what is the covering which gives women power on her head?
1Co 11:15 (15) But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.
It is not a veil, it is not hair extensions, it is not a wig, but it is her actual long hair, which grows naturally.
So the covering in the sense of a veil provides not this long hair covering, and nether does fake hair, wigs, or hair extensions, for the bible says her hair, not fake hair, not someone else's hair, but her actual hair is given her for a covering.
So I believe that the Corinthians had a good intention in their custom of reproving or hiding shame, but in the end that is all it did.
1Co 11:16 (16) But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.
And it is not that all men and women were contentious about this custom, it is just that some were.
That is why it is not veils, or baldness that covers men's sins, or enables men to be used of God, it is the blood of the Lamb that covers men's sin, and if it were not for the blood of the Lamb, none of us could be used of God.
Now of course their needs to be obedience, but if a woman seen her wrong, and did truly repent, and is now obeying God, letting her hair grow, why wouldn't God use this person?
And what about the woman who cannot grow long hair, are you saying God cannot prophesy through her? For the woman did not sin, for she cannot grow long hair.
|
|
PG4Him
Senior Member
Essay Moderator
Posts: 3,570
|
Post by PG4Him on May 4, 2019 8:32:48 GMT -5
Let me add a few clarifiers to my view...
I don’t think Paul said there was no custom to debate. He spoke of the Jewish custom that long hair gave power and also the universal custom that women had long hair. You can’t really oppose him on that because those customs were well known and there’s no custom anywhere of it being the other way around. Nowhere in the civilized world did Paul see a culture that told men to have longer hair than women. No one could oppose this teaching on cultural grounds.
On the subject of unclean vessels prophesying... it isn’t a matter of whether God ‘uses’ them. Paul didn’t speak about the Holy Spirit in this passage. He said a covered woman had power on her head toward angels. This isn’t a matter of whether God is pleased with a woman’s modesty; it’s a matter of supernatural power. Samson’s hair was cut by someone else against his knowledge, and he certainly repented many a time in the days after, but he didn’t get his power back. Why, because this was OT before the cross? Did God love him any less? Did his repentance not work? People were able to repent in those days and return to God’s favor. But how things work in the spirit realm are simply how things work, and God is not required to change the rules to accommodate our mistakes. Forgiveness doesn’t always mean no consequence.
It can’t be a wig because there are no wigs in the OT, so therefore it has to be a veil? But then it’s okay to take an OT veil, change its meaning, shrink it to a hair cover, and still call it a veil? I looked high and low for anything in the Torah commanding women to appear in public in a veil. It may have been a manmade tradition, but it wasn’t law. Paul taught from Scripture, not from tradition. Why did he say women have to be covered when they prophesy if they were covered all the time anyway?
And Rebekah lifted up her eyes, and when she saw Isaac, she lighted off the camel. For she had said unto the servant, What man is this that walketh in the field to meet us? And the servant had said, It is my master: therefore she took a veil, and covered herself. — Genesis 24:64-65
Well, that’s awkward. She was in public without a veil.
Did she wear it to be modest or to cover her face? Veils hid faces. This is why brides traditionally had a wedding veil cover their face until the first kiss. That’s why Jacob didn’t think it was strange when he married Leah hidden in a veil. That was the whole point of a veil.
And she put her widow's garments off from her, and covered her with a veil, and wrapped herself, and sat in an open place, which is by the way to Timnah; for she saw that Shelah was grown, and she was not given unto him to wife. When Judah saw her, he thought her to be an harlot; because she had covered her face. — Genesis 38:14-15
Oh my word. This is even more awkward.
And not as Moses, which put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished — 2 Corinthians 3:13
Veils covered faces. There’s no way around this. Did women pray back then with their faces uncovered?
And it came to pass, as she continued praying before the Lord, that Eli marked her mouth. Now Hannah, she spake in her heart; only her lips moved, but her voice was not heard: therefore Eli thought she had been drunken. — 1 Samuel 1:12-13
How did Eli watch her mouth if she was wearing a veil?
So we have to assume Paul meant veil and nothing else, but not really a veil, just kind of a veil?
|
|
PG4Him
Senior Member
Essay Moderator
Posts: 3,570
|
Post by PG4Him on May 4, 2019 9:00:36 GMT -5
What exactly is Paul teaching in this passage?
Option 1: Women must be modest and submissive, so women must wear a veil as a show of piety, and this will please God and He will be happy and listen to their prayers, and it isn’t much deeper than that.
Option 2: Women are anointed for intercessory warfare when they pray/prophesy, as this is how they serve the men of ekklesia, not prophesying in authority over the group but speaking prophetically to assist others, and this serving of the men is man’s relief/glory as he cannot pray this way for himself, and this is what women are empowered to do in the spirit realm. Men pray and prophesy to God’s glory; women pray and prophesy to provide intercessory relief for other people. A woman’s long hair is the natural sign of this, and if she doesn’t value her hair she isn’t valuing this gift.
If you go with option 1, you’ll fret over veils and covers to preserve your modesty. If you go with option 2, you will greatly esteem your hair.
Anyway, there’s not much more I can say on this topic without repeating myself.
|
|
|
Post by John on May 4, 2019 9:26:40 GMT -5
But to the one's who believe that if a woman has short hair, that they should maybe have a veil or have a hair extension covering, until their hair grows back long, do you think that this can be considered their covering temporarily until they grow there hair long? Or does the blood cover it, until they grow their hair long? But what if they choose the option of being shaven? I have never taken it that being shaven was an option. I have taken this to say that she may as well be shaven as go around with short hair. He was wanting us to see this picture of a bald woman so we could see what a shame short hair was on a woman. It was a type of word picture.
If a woman has short hair and was unaware of this teaching, I believe she can just stop cutting it until it grows out again. If a woman has some medical reason why she has lost her hair or it won't grow long, a wig or extensions are an option. I personally don't think this is a sin unto death where a woman will go to hell if her hair is short, so I am not thinking so much about the blood covering it, as much as how she has no power on her head, and there is also the symbolism here.
|
|
PG4Him
Senior Member
Essay Moderator
Posts: 3,570
|
Post by PG4Him on May 4, 2019 9:30:41 GMT -5
But to the one's who believe that if a woman has short hair, that they should maybe have a veil or have a hair extension covering, until their hair grows back long, do you think that this can be considered their covering temporarily until they grow there hair long? Or does the blood cover it, until they grow their hair long? But what if they choose the option of being shaven? I have never taken it that being shaven was an option. I have taken this to say that she may as well be shaven as go around with short hair. He was wanting us to see this picture of a bald woman so we could see what a shame short hair was on a woman. It was a type of word picture.
If a woman has short hair and was unaware of this teaching, I believe she can just stop cutting it until it grows out again. If a woman has some medical reason why she has lost her hair or it won't grow long, a wig or extensions are an option. I personally don't think this is a sin unto death where a woman will go to hell if her hair is short, so I am not thinking so much about the blood covering it, as much as how she has no power on her head, and there is also the symbolism here.
This is pretty much exactly how I see it. Paul was saying “If you don’t value your hair, why not go for broke and shave it off since you don’t seem to care? If you’re not brave enough to go around bald, then take a little pride in your hair.”
|
|
|
Post by John on May 4, 2019 9:46:09 GMT -5
What exactly is Paul teaching in this passage? Option 1: Women must be modest and submissive, so women must wear a veil as a show of piety, and this will please God and He will be happy and listen to their prayers, and it isn’t much deeper than that. Option 2: Women are anointed for intercessory warfare when they pray/prophesy, as this is how they serve the men of ekklesia, not prophesying in authority over the group but speaking prophetically to assist others, and this serving of the men is man’s relief/glory as he cannot pray this way for himself, and this is what women are empowered to do in the spirit realm. Men pray and prophesy to God’s glory; women pray and prophesy to provide intercessory relief for other people. A woman’s long hair is the natural sign of this, and if she doesn’t value her hair she isn’t valuing this gift. If you go with option 1, you’ll fret over veils and covers to preserve your modesty. If you go with option 2, you will greatly esteem your hair. Anyway, there’s not much more I can say on this topic without repeating myself. We should care about the why, and I do, so I appreciate your explanations about hair and power. I have never heard anyone with this view. In reality, most just ignore the entire passage like it doesn't exist. But my feeling is, even if you are not sure of the reason, there is nothing stopping anyone from simply doing their best to follow the teaching. What happened to trust and obey? If you are a man, keep your hair short, and if you are a woman, keep your hair long. If you are a man with long hair, cut it. If you are a woman with short hair, let it grow long. Yes, as Giller said, it was speaking of "her hair" being the covering, not just hair, but that is really being nit picky. The covering is hair, so if she has a condition and she can't grow her hair out, I see a wig as an option today. The main thing is, she shouldn't go around bald or uncovered. Do the best you can in your situation.
With regard to Samson, you made a good point, His power only returned when his hair grew long. That is when he was able to pull the beam out from under the house and kill the Philistines. He had no power while his hair was short. A woman with short hair has no power on her head.
And Giller, I am not meaning it is being nit picky as putting down what you said. I mean that I don't think that just because it says it that way, a wig couldn't be an option temporarily to be used as a covering since wigs are available today. I know a Pastor's wife who is completely bald because of a medical condition, and she wears a wig all the time. I think the wig serves the same purpose her hair would have served, as God looks at the heart, but it would be better if she could grow her natural hair out to do so.
|
|
PG4Him
Senior Member
Essay Moderator
Posts: 3,570
|
Post by PG4Him on May 4, 2019 10:10:24 GMT -5
We should care about the why, and I do, so I appreciate your explanations about hair and power. I have never heard anyone with this view. Yeah I get that a lot.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2019 11:38:58 GMT -5
Let's be careful here brothers and sisters....where it was said that we have power with angels needs to be examined to see if that be so. There needs to be some further witness in scripture to that. To my understanding we may have power with God (so to speak) in prayer, but I don't see where we have power with angels. We pray to God alone, and He answers our prayers and sends angels to do His bidding as He sees fit. So can we please examine that part.
I think it's correct that there is a scriptural/spiritual significance to hair, that I do agree with....but some of the rest I believe needs to be looked at more carefully.
I will try to come back later on.....not able to give this my undivided attention right now....but if anyone knows of scriptures that show we have power with angels, I hope they will bring them and put my mind at ease on that.
|
|
PG4Him
Senior Member
Essay Moderator
Posts: 3,570
|
Post by PG4Him on May 4, 2019 12:12:26 GMT -5
I don’t know what this power entails. Is this the power to break into the spirit realm? To see angels? To hear angels? To somehow have an influence on them? I don’t know. I’m not here trying to say women can willy-nilly tell angels what to do. We know Gabriel appeared to Mary and they had a lengthy conversation. We don’t worship angels, but we can interact with them, and in some cases we can even entertain them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2019 15:21:47 GMT -5
Well, I'm glad for the conversation and opportunity to look at these scriptures again....helping me to see it a little more clear than I used to, thanks be to God. One thing is that I think we need to remember not to overlook the concept of headship. The 1 Cor. 11 verses start out with the idea of headship and are interspersed with that theme...so it needs to be included in how we understand this whole thing about head covering.
1Co 11:3-16 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. 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. 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. For a man indeed ought not to cover his hd, 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. For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels. 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. Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered? Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering. But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.
I know it can be hard, when the mind is already on one track, to try and look at something with fresh eyes..to switch over to another track, so to speak. At least I often find it like that...all the more as I get older. But at least maybe we could try to keep the idea of headship in mind...it can take time for a penny to drop. Also there can be things in the way of us seeing scriptural truth...cultural conditioning is one, fears can be another, experiences growing up, etc. Nothing to do with how knowledgeable of the bible we may be, or lacking in knowledge....the reasons are often spiritual...we can sometimes have blind spots due to issues that need the help of the Lord to heal.
|
|
PG4Him
Senior Member
Essay Moderator
Posts: 3,570
|
Post by PG4Him on May 4, 2019 15:57:14 GMT -5
watchful you are making my case for me. What does man as the head have to do with prayer and prophecy? But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. — 1 Timothy 2:12Women aren’t anointed to be the prophetic leader of elders in a group. They shouldn’t tell a group what to pray for, pray in opposition to the elders, or correct an elder’s prophetic interpretation. A man with a prophetic gift should not be discipled by a woman. Of course in the home, a more mature woman can do some coaching with her husband/children, but she shouldn’t be formally discipling other young men. Prayer and worship in ekklesia is ministering to the Lord: As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them. — Acts 13:2
And he appointed certain of the Levites to minister before the ark of the Lord, and to record, and to thank and praise the Lord God of Israel — 1 Chronicles 16:4Christians as the royal priesthood have gone behind the veil to minister to the Lord in His presence. We attend to Him, wait on Him, listen to His words, and sing His praises. Elders in a fellowship are primarily responsible for most of this workload, and women assist the men in their needs. I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea: That ye receive her in the Lord, as becometh saints, and that ye assist her in whatsoever business she hath need of you: for she hath been a succourer of many, and of myself also. Greet Priscilla and Aquila my helpers in Christ Jesus — Romans 16:1-3This is basic gender theology established in Genesis: And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. — Genesis 2:18
|
|