777
Senior Member
Teacher
Posts: 1,189
|
Post by 777 on Mar 18, 2020 10:39:31 GMT -5
People are so brainwashed today. They had a thread going about whether Paul was saying women should wear a veil, or if their long hair is their covering. All I said was the text says the covering is her hair, and like a parrot, I get told that God doesn't care about our hair length, and this is legalism. Who is the legalist, Paul? This isn't even part of the law of Moses. It is New Testament teaching. How can it be legalism? Besides all that, the Bible never speaks against legalism.
|
|
|
Post by Tabitha3319 on Mar 18, 2020 10:46:21 GMT -5
People are so brainwashed today. They had a thread going about whether Paul was saying women should wear a veil, or if their long hair is their covering. All I said was the text says the covering is her hair, and like a parrot, I get told that God doesn't care about our hair length, and this is legalism. Who is the legalist, Paul? This isn't even part of the law of Moses. It is New Testament teaching. How can it be legalism? Besides all that, the Bible never speaks against legalism. I'm quite open to hair coverings. I often cover my hair when praying as a sign of authority to the angels. But yes, legalism seems to be a blanket term to dismiss anything that people don't want to deal with in the Bible.
|
|
777
Senior Member
Teacher
Posts: 1,189
|
Post by 777 on Mar 18, 2020 15:52:17 GMT -5
This time it was Missmuffet. I don't think I said anything besides it said it was hair.
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Mar 18, 2020 15:57:09 GMT -5
I did not see anything in Scripture showing that the hair was her covering spoken of in the NT as directed for women to wear during prayer and prophesying at least. According to recent reports, all the women in all the churches wore coverings over their hair until women's lib started rejecting that less than 200 years ago.
|
|
777
Senior Member
Teacher
Posts: 1,189
|
Post by 777 on Mar 18, 2020 16:10:38 GMT -5
I did not see anything in Scripture showing that the hair was her covering spoken of in the NT as directed for women to wear during prayer and prophesying at least. According to recent reports, all the women in all the churches wore coverings over their hair until women's lib started rejecting that less than 200 years ago. I'm not against head coverings, but 1 Corinthians 11:15 says, "her hair is given her for a covering."
|
|
|
Post by Tabitha3319 on Mar 18, 2020 16:30:20 GMT -5
I did not see anything in Scripture showing that the hair was her covering spoken of in the NT as directed for women to wear during prayer and prophesying at least. According to recent reports, all the women in all the churches wore coverings over their hair until women's lib started rejecting that less than 200 years ago. I'm not against head coverings, but 1 Corinthians 11:15 says, "her hair is given her for a covering."I am glad to be growing my hair out again. I will look at those verses again.
|
|
|
Post by Tabitha3319 on Mar 19, 2020 7:14:01 GMT -5
I did not see anything in Scripture showing that the hair was her covering spoken of in the NT as directed for women to wear during prayer and prophesying at least. According to recent reports, all the women in all the churches wore coverings over their hair until women's lib started rejecting that less than 200 years ago. I'm not against head coverings, but 1 Corinthians 11:15 says, "her hair is given her for a covering."I looked at the chapter again. It does seem to say long hair is a covering.
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Mar 19, 2020 8:39:08 GMT -5
"SOLUTION
The issue at Corinth was not whether long or short hair was an acceptable covering, but whether or not the head was covered with a veil or hat. This is proven by the following: ----"Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head" (v. 4). The distinction here is obviously not between short and long-haired brethren, but rather between men with covered and uncovered heads. ---- Contentious sisters were provided with an alter native: either cover the head or be shorn or shaven ( v. 6). But if long hair were the intended covering, then the Apostle's alternative is meaningless. "Cover" ( -ed, -ing) in the A.V. disguises the fact that different words for "to cover" are used in the Greek text. The distinction between two of these, "katakalupto" and "peribolaion" proves that a veil or head covering, and not long hair is intended. These words are as follows: --- "Katakalupto" ( 'kata' = 'fully'; 'kalupto' = 'to cover up'), "to cover fully" ( Yg). This word occurs through out verses 5- 13 and is translated "veil" in the R.S.V.; Nestle and Marshall's "Interlinear Greek-English New Testament'' and many other versions. These translations make it plain that the issue relates to a head covering, not the growth of hair, long or short. -----"Peribolaion" ('peri' = 'around'; 'ballo' = 'to throw, cast'), "something cast around" ( Y g). The long hair of a woman is her glory - like a mantle cast around ( v. 15) .(8) But this is not to be displayed in the assembly of believers before the presence of God. The intended covering in the ecclesial meeting is the "katakalupto" ---- the head covering or veil. "
|
|
|
Post by John on Mar 19, 2020 8:53:02 GMT -5
"SOLUTION The issue at Corinth was not whether long or short hair was an acceptable covering, but whether or not the head was covered with a veil or hat. This is proven by the following: ----"Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head" (v. 4). The distinction here is obviously not between short and long-haired brethren, but rather between men with covered and uncovered heads. ---- Contentious sisters were provided with an alter native: either cover the head or be shorn or shaven ( v. 6). But if long hair were the intended covering, then the Apostle's alternative is meaningless. "Cover" ( -ed, -ing) in the A.V. disguises the fact that different words for "to cover" are used in the Greek text. The distinction between two of these, "katakalupto" and "peribolaion" proves that a veil or head covering, and not long hair is intended. These words are as follows: --- "Katakalupto" ( 'kata' = 'fully'; 'kalupto' = 'to cover up'), "to cover fully" ( Yg). This word occurs through out verses 5- 13 and is translated "veil" in the R.S.V.; Nestle and Marshall's "Interlinear Greek-English New Testament'' and many other versions. These translations make it plain that the issue relates to a head covering, not the growth of hair, long or short. -----"Peribolaion" ('peri' = 'around'; 'ballo' = 'to throw, cast'), "something cast around" ( Y g). The long hair of a woman is her glory - like a mantle cast around ( v. 15) .(8) But this is not to be displayed in the assembly of believers before the presence of God. The intended covering in the ecclesial meeting is the "katakalupto" ---- the head covering or veil. " The issue was long or short hair. Long hair is considered covered and short hair is considered uncovered. The text itself proves that is true. It states it right in the text, as Triple 7 already showed.
But if a woman have LONG HAIR, it is a glory to her: FOR HER HAIR is given her FOR A COVERING. 1 Corinthians 11:15
I do not know how anyone cannot see this.
|
|
|
Post by Tabitha3319 on Mar 19, 2020 9:23:09 GMT -5
"SOLUTION The issue at Corinth was not whether long or short hair was an acceptable covering, but whether or not the head was covered with a veil or hat. This is proven by the following: ----"Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head" (v. 4). The distinction here is obviously not between short and long-haired brethren, but rather between men with covered and uncovered heads. ---- Contentious sisters were provided with an alter native: either cover the head or be shorn or shaven ( v. 6). But if long hair were the intended covering, then the Apostle's alternative is meaningless. "Cover" ( -ed, -ing) in the A.V. disguises the fact that different words for "to cover" are used in the Greek text. The distinction between two of these, "katakalupto" and "peribolaion" proves that a veil or head covering, and not long hair is intended. These words are as follows: --- "Katakalupto" ( 'kata' = 'fully'; 'kalupto' = 'to cover up'), "to cover fully" ( Yg). This word occurs through out verses 5- 13 and is translated "veil" in the R.S.V.; Nestle and Marshall's "Interlinear Greek-English New Testament'' and many other versions. These translations make it plain that the issue relates to a head covering, not the growth of hair, long or short. -----"Peribolaion" ('peri' = 'around'; 'ballo' = 'to throw, cast'), "something cast around" ( Y g). The long hair of a woman is her glory - like a mantle cast around ( v. 15) .(8) But this is not to be displayed in the assembly of believers before the presence of God. The intended covering in the ecclesial meeting is the "katakalupto" ---- the head covering or veil. " The issue was long or short hair. Long hair is considered covered and short hair is considered uncovered. The text itself proves that is true. It states it right in the text, as Triple 7 already showed.
But if a woman have LONG HAIR, it is a glory to her: FOR HER HAIR is given her FOR A COVERING. 1 Corinthians 11:15
I do not know how anyone cannot see this.
On first read, I got: "Wear a covering on the hair." Not just having long hair. So as not to offend anyone, I will have to grow the long hair and get a fabulous hat.
|
|
|
Post by Tabitha3319 on Mar 20, 2020 2:28:02 GMT -5
I have another theory about why women cover their heads.
Corinthians says it's a sign of authority to the angels. I always wondered about this.
Maybe, because angels are attracted to human women, (Genesis 6:2-4), the head covering sort of keeps order.
|
|
|
Post by John on Apr 9, 2020 14:36:00 GMT -5
I have another theory about why women cover their heads. Corinthians says it's a sign of authority to the angels. I always wondered about this. Maybe, because angels are attracted to human women, (Genesis 6:2-4), the head covering sort of keeps order. I have heard many ideas about the why, but nobody can be absolutely sure about the connection to the angels. The only thing that seems obvious to me is that short hair on a man and long hair on a woman are signs that we are not in rebellion, but are in submission to our spiritual head, whether that be the husband in relation to the wife, or Christ in relation to the man and the church.
|
|