Christian Head Covering

To Karen,
I really do not know why the Lord showed this to me first. Possibly to cause me to pray and to see how I would handle it. You see I asked my husband his permission, I came to him first after the Lord.

I wanted to share some quotes from Hulshizer's book, "The Truth of Headship and it's Symbolic Practices." BTW, this excellent book can be ordered for free by writing to: Spread the Word 2721 Oberlin Drive York, PA 17404

"The primary purpose of Paul's teaching
in this passage is to correct the saints'
misunderstanding that God's grace sets
aside God's government. In God's grace
there is neither male nor female(Gal 3:28)
But, in God's government there is clearly
a distinction between the roles of the man
and the woman."

Another quote from the same book is:
"What is happening in the church today
under the name of grace and progress,
is a repeat of the garden of Eden!
It is also a repeat of the error that
exisited in the disorderly church in
Corinth! It may be an indication of the
Lord's soon return."

My pastor preaches the expository way and he did a complete line by line study of 1 Corinthians. All the while he told the church that the church today is very similar to the one at Corinth. BTW, he did teach on 1 Corinthians 11 as he went through this.

Another quote I found in Hulshizers book:
"When the truth of headship is
practiced, both in principle and
symbolically, a wonderful message
is broadcast to the heavenly hosts-
God's government, set aside in the
garden, has been reestablished under
the Headship of Christ!"

Oh, I absolultely love that above quote! It really sums it up for me. The whole purpose of wearing the covering is stated right there.


Another quote from Hulshizer:
"Think too for a moment what the presence
of a "physical copy" of the Bible meant
on a teachers desk in our public schools.
It was a "visual reminder" of the
authority of God, and of His ways and
principles. When we took the visual
reminder away it was only a matter of
time before the truth of God
and His authority were
forgotten in our nation."

I also find it interesting that in the Vines Dictionary there are two words for covering this one is found in verse five: one is "katakalupto: "to cover up, veiled."

The second one is found in verse 15:"peribolaion, someting thrown around down the head."

Two DIFFERENT Greek words for the same English word, covering. HMMM...

Many of the modern commentaries have been changed to reflect the woman's refusal to wear the covering but even in a modern commentary such as Ungers Bible Handbook we find the following:
"Paul presents the women's headdress as
a symbol of her subordination to the
man,as the man in turn is subordinated
to Christ, 4-6. The apostle uses the
OT to show that man is made in the
image and for the glory of God
(Gen 1:27), and when praying or
or preaching he should not have his
head covered, in token of God's order
among the sexes, 7. Man was created
first. The woman was made from man,
8. Hence, man's headship. Therefore,
the Christian woman ought to have the
badge of her husband's authority on
her head 'because of the angels,'
10.i.e., because of the divine order
that prevails among the elect unfallen
angels(cf.Ps 103:20), who are looking
on the human scene."

I find it highly interesting that even Unger's handbook contains this information.

And I bought for my husband's birthday recently; this book: "Sketches of Jewish Social Life," by Alfred Edersheim. This book was written in the late 1800's. In this book are some fascinating facts about women of the period during Jesus' time on earth.

"Ordinarily, it was most strictly
enjoined upon women to have their
hair and head carefully covered.
This may throw some light on the
difficult passage, 1 Cor. 11:1-10.
We must bear in mind that the
apostle there argues with Jews,
that on their ground, convincing
them by a reference to their own
views, customs, and legends of the
propriety of the practice hich he
enjoins. From that point of view
the propriety of a woman having her
head "covered" could not be called
in question. The opposite would to
a Jew, have indicated immondesty.
Indeed, it was the custom in the
case of a woman accused of adultery
to have her hair "shorn or shaven"

There is more in Edersheims book but I will leave it at that. From what I remember Haleys Bible handbook teaches the literal covering and I am sure Ryrie's Bible study commentary does too, I have that one and can quote his comments if anyone is interested. This one comes with the Bible, the commentary is written in paragraphs at the bottom. Ryrie is a modern man and he dared to state that the covering is for today.

Here are some other sites that teaches what leading Christian men of days gone by taught on the subject:
http://users.bigpond.net.au/joeflorence/hc.htm

http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF1-12/npnf1-12-31.htm

And this book may be read online:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Cyprus/7560/LetHerBeVeiled.html

Maggie,
I am interested in hearing more about the protection aspect of covering from you as well. I know that God has protected and blessed me many many times in spite of myself. Before I was saved there were times I should have died. And even after becoming His child through His perfect blood there were so many times He has blessed and protected me even though I was disobedient.

But, I wonder what if Moses did not teach the people to put the blood on the doorposts what would have happened to their children. And what if he taught them but they disobeyed? The angels could not have seen in to the hearts of the Israelites to know which were which so they needed a sign above the doors. How would they have known who they were?
I recognize that the purpose of Moses covering the doors with blood was to point to Jesus' blood covering sinners, but to me I see how angels operate somewhat.

Also, while I was originally stuyding this topic I found interesting Scriptures in the OT relating to covering: Numbers 5, the adulterous woman is told to uncover her hair, Isaiah 47:3, the veil off and thigh showing btw, is nakedness, Ezekial 13:21, Veils torn off as judgement, Gen 24:65, Veil worn by Rebekah, Isaiah 3:17-24, veils again removed as judgement, and finally the most interesting one I think is found in Isaiah 6:2, the seraphims when they come before the Lord they cover their faces and feet.

These helped me because Scripture best interprets Scripture.

HCL

[ December 01, 2002, 12:41 PM: Message edited by: Headcoveredlady ]

 

HCL, the way many interpret 'head coverings' today is completely foreign to what is being talked about in the Bible. There is no indication anywhere of anything in terms of veils which are not rather large mantles or such which are thrown entirely across the head, thus covering up the identity of the woman. The idea of a small bit of cloth pinned on the hair is a totally foreign thing where the Bible is concerned and a bad misrepresentation of what Paul is talking about.

 

I personally do not wear a small bit of cloth pinned to the head. But, I believe the Vines Dictionary definition to be correct as I quoted above. Also, Scripture interprets Scripture best that is why I have listed the verses above.

HCL

 

Scripture does indeed interpret Scripture the best -- especially if we understand the meaning of the words used, which is exactly why I wanted to know the truth of what was being said -- which is why I did the study regarding hair last night. Paul NEVER was talking about what some of you ladies espouse as being biblical.

I was curious. I really was. I was ready to change if that is indeed what Paul was talking about. My obedience to the Lord is much more important than my being right on my own!

But do you know what my reaction has been last night and this morning when I realized what was actually being said? "I'm free!"

He has given us so much freedom in Himself! I just don't think most people are comfortable with it, but I'm learning!

I do enjoy being a girl and to know that that was what God intended all along is a wonderfully freeing thing for me as a woman and a mother and a friend.

So I think you for getting me more involved in this topic. I had no idea what was waiting at the end of it when I started yesterday.

When Barry and I were talking on the phone about it, he asked me, "You mean you felt guilty when you cut your hair?"

And I said, "A little, yes, I did."

"Oh, Honey! Why did you do it then?"

"Because you asked me to. But everything is OK now. I know it's all OK and I am so happy about that!"

But you see, HCL, you had produced some guilt feelings in me, too, but it was false guilt and God was faithful to dispel it the same way He always has done for me when I have fallen into traps of one kind or another: through Bible study. He is so faithful, and so loving

...and so FREEING!

 

My intent was not to make Helen feel guilty, nor anyone else. My intent is two-fold. One to discuss this with other veiled sisters, and two if there are those who are considering this and are I want to encourage them and show them the miriad of Scripture that interprets these verse, history, meanings of words and commentaries of learned men, and lastly my own personal experience.


HCL

[ December 01, 2002, 01:27 PM: Message edited by: Headcoveredlady ]

 

Karen,
I wanted to give more to my answer about women being convicted to wear the covering before the man has commanded them to.
There are two trains of thought on this one. The first being that the woman ought to not cover her head unless commanded or directed to by her male authority, husband or father or Pastor. I agree with this personally if the male authority has stated something like, "There is no way you are wearing that covering."

The second train of thought is found from 1 Peter 3 in that the woman ought to by her chaste and respectable behavior win the husband. So, to me if the husband is unsaved or possibly not in the Word the woman is to be an example not a preacher to him. She should first of all submit to his God-given authority and secondly wear the headship veiling as a visible symbol to God, him, the angels, other believers, and non-believers that she has submitted herself to God's government.

HCL

 

To Brother Glen,
You have stated that you remember when women wore hats to church. Do you think this was only for fashion of the times? Or was it something left over from days gone by when women understood the veiling purpose.
I have heard that some Primitive Baptist churches teach women to wear the literal sign covering, while others do not. I have also been told by my Pastor in his sermon on coverings that there is a movement in INDEPENDENT BAPTIST CHURCHES IN KENTUCKY WHERE ALL THE WOMEN COVER.
It is interesting to note that in the original movie, "Heidi," there is a church scene and all the women have hats on and the men have none. I am not saying this movie is doctrine just something I noticed about the period in which the movie was made.

HCL

 

HCL, when I started my Bible study last night, I was willing to change. My heart was open entirely to what God was saying in the Bible.

Now I ask you if you are the same.

Are you willing to forsake the traditions you have known and even defended for what the Bible is really saying? If not, why not?

 

This thread has made me all the more glad that I have a non-submissive, head-uncovered, pants-wearing, successful, career-oriented wife with whom to share my life.

For those of you for whom this is a positive life decision - I am genuinely happy for you. If some can be eunuchs for Christ, others can certainly cover their heads. It is certainly, however, not my cup of tea.

Joshua

 

Greetings Headcoveredlady! I've noticed in a few videos the family has watched, one in particular called "Sheffey" about a circuit-riding preacher of yesteryear, and all the ladies wore some kind of covering, whether hats in the church house or scarves at home...they also wore dresses.

 

Granny, I've noticed in a lot of videos that I have watched that the Romans, and even Jesus, all wore tunics and robes.

I will ask you the same thing I asked HCL -- are you willing to forsake the traditions of man for what the Bible is actually saying?

If not, why not?

 

Hcl~I plan to write and ask for that free book you've mentioned. I had read a book(Fully After the Lord) a good while back written by a Baptist & I checked to see if it's on the 'net & bingo!

Here's some of what Steve Flinchum has to say:
"Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.

Very few, it seems, have any problem accepting that verse as simply meaning what it says. For almost two-thousand years now, men who wear hats have taken them off at the door of the meeting house and left them off until going out. Why, then, is there so much contention with verse 5 which is a counterpart to verse 4? Why is there so much maneuvering around to try to neutralize verse 5? Should we not consider verse 5 to simply mean what it says, just like verse 4? Verse 5 says:

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.

Illustration is made by likening and comparing the shame of the appearance of a woman with her head uncovered in the assembly of one of Jesus' congregations with the shame of a woman appearing in public with her head shaven. It "is even all one as if she were shaven." Verse 6 says:

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.

Going back to the man's head, verse 7 says:

For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.

Verses 8 and 9 further explain:

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.

Verse 10 says:

For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.

"For this cause" (because of God's ordained order that man "is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man") ought the woman to have hair on her head in public and an artificial covering on her head when she assembles with the Lord's congregation--"because of the angels." We should be careful to not offend nor give example that may cause angels to keep not their first estate. We have the responsibility to glorify God in word and example both to people and angels. Verse 13 says:

Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?

Nature is again used to further illustrate the principal of the matter in verses 14 and 15:

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.

Every day and everywhere a man should have a man's hair style and a woman should have a woman's hair style. Likewise, when one of Jesus' congregations assemble together to pray or to learn from God's Word, a man's head should have no artificial covering and a woman's head should have an artificial covering. Popular styles may change, but God's style DOES NOT. There should be a distinct difference in the style and manner of dress for men and women for all the same reasons.

The subject is concluded with verse 16 which says:

But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.

Any custom of contention against the plain teaching of the Word of God has no place in "the churches of God."

 

The Greek never says 'long hair.'

How long will you who support the cloths on the head be unwilling to learn what the Bible is really saying? How long will you depend on others to tell you what God Himself has meant.

Concordances are not that hard to find. Spend some time searching for the truth yourself if you are truly interested in what the truth is. You don't have to believe me or the study on hair that I did yesterday. Do the study yourself. You will find what is being spoken of.

 

Huh....
Kind of confused with this here. I have stated the meanings of the word from the Bible, back up Scripture with Scripture and the fact that I was not raised this way so for me this goes in the exact opposite way of tradition for me. The only tradition I see presented here is against God's designed order of headship. And that is the tradition of men which I am forsaking.

The many,many links and commentaries I listed are written by learned men of the Word and I also think their words mean something. I am curious if you have read any of these. But, honestly Helen, I am not here to convince you of anything.

Helen, I will not say that because I have studied this for alot longer and through many more sources that I know more than you, because I honestly do not know what you know and have studied. But, you have stated in your mutual submission threads your positions regarding headship.

In turn I ask you a question, have you prayed earnestely about this? You said you studied it, but did you pray about it? And have you asked your head, your husband what he thought of it?

Helen,
When I say this I sincerely mean it, I am not trying to convince you of this. You have your own personal relationship with the Lord and your husband. And I as well. The Lord through much prayer and His Word has taught me that I am to wear the headship veiling. If you have peace that you are not to wear the headship it is between you and the Lord. The convicting only comes from the Lord, not me. I have presented many sources of teaching, Bible verses, meaning of words and my personal testimony. You have presented yours. And you have a thread going entitled hair. I hope that all that you post helps others grow closer to the Lord.

Joshua,
I find it very interesting that you have linked all those things together as well, non-submissive, non-covered, pants wearing and career woman.

hcl

 

Granny,
Thank you for taking the time to write that out. Can you tell me where I can get that book? I have not heard of too many Baptists with this position.

HCl

 

HCL, please read the study we did last night on hair. I wanted to know the truth. I found it. It is not confusing at all, just VERY different from what you have been promoting. A friend of my husband's was at church with his last night (Sunday night was 'last night' in Australia right now!). He is a Greek from Greece. Barry talked to him about this material. He said that the Greek does not mean what some of the translators said at all! I asked Barnabas here on the Board to check his Hungarian translation as it was from the Greek and Hebrew and pre-dates the King James -- the one mistake I asked about which is present in the KJV and modern versions was not in his.

The truth is there. You have to dig a little instead of paying attention to what others -- even so many others -- have written, but it is there. What you have done here on Baptist Board is make a lot of us feel guilty for no reason at all. You say you did not intend to, and the intent of your heart is something only God can judge, but the effect of what you wrote and the way you wrote it was to cause guilt -- and, as it turns out, false and unnecessary guilt.

Here is the thread on the Hair study. See what you think:
http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=10;t=001935

You see, it doesn't matter how much you study a subject -- if someone does not check word definitions in the original language, the study is basically in vain and can easily lead one astray as it will be based only on man's opinions. This is what has happened to you folks. Please seriously reconsider how you are trying to influence people -- it is not in line with the Bible as far as the real meaning is concerned.

Thank you.

Helen

 

Hcl~I have to let you in on my secret...I did not actually type all that out...daughter Robin(Farmer's Wife) has shown me how to drag the mouse over stuff & it is sooo neat!

I think I remember getting that book from a newspaper I receive from the Berea Baptist Church, where they do cover, & even sell head coverings at their bookstore, I think I read in the paper.

Their pastor recently passed away, but he had sent me his little booklet a year or so ago called "The Veiled Woman" by Milburn Cockrell.
Here is their website: http://www.bereabaptistchurch.org/

[ December 01, 2002, 02:51 PM: Message edited by: GrannyGumbo ]

 

HCL, I was wondering if people who have never seen you before, and don't know anything baout you, even hat your a chrisitan, come up to you and just start asking about Jesus, assuming a woman with her head covered is a christian? Or do they ask becasue they already know your a christian? Like they've asked you why, and you say becasue of Jesus, and then they begin to ask you about Jesus? Just wanting to be clear on exactly what you mean.

 

See now, I don't have this problem, I do have the desire to be a good christian wife and am constantly looks for what I can do to be just that to my husband.I seek to be the best wife I can be.
So it seems to say just what I said in the post I started.

Have you considered that God who knows the heart even better then we do, knows you need this, and also knows another woman may not. There are some here I am sure they have not made this concideration, have not thought about this.

 

A woman shouldn't have to ask her husband if she can cover her hair, but if he is the head, he should tell her he'd prefer if she did it. By taking the lead on should the head be covered, she has in effect stepped ahead of him, and taken his authority.