coverings & such

[DeeJay]

I think there are a lot worse things to be sad about than some tip of the hat people did, while committing other sins that were common back then, such as oppressing their fellow man (even trying to reason that others were only 3/5th of a man, etc), oppressing women, often.

What difference does it make to you, really, whether someone removes their hat? What good does that do for humanity, the Gospel, or any other aspect of life? Again, that is straining at a gnat. I would rather have people respect me in ther word and direct actions. Taking a hat off means nothing when they're stabbing me in the back just as much as anybody today might.

I see what you are saying. But I think not showing respect is a symptom of a sociaty that is less polite and more self centered. You could make the same argument about not saying please or thank you. Or not holding the door. Or cutting in front of somebody in line.

The sad thing is that as a whole sociaty is becoming more self involved and less thinking of their fellow citizen. This leads to a whole range of what you would consider more serious problems. Not tipping the hat is a sign of this and is sad.

 

[abcgrad94]

When my hubby wears a hat it means:

1. It's winter and his head is cold
2. He hasn't had a shower or combed his hair. . .or
3. He's about to do something on his honey-do list. (Maybe the hat helps cover his ears and drowns out my reminding him of other projects that need done.):laugh:

Frankly, I'd much rather see a man in a ball cap eating in a restaurant than one covered head to toe with body piercings and grotesque tatoos. At least the hat doesn't affect my appetite!

 

[DeeJay]

body piercings and grotesque tatoos.

Wow, judgemental. You have problems if tattoos make you loose your appitite.

 

[abcgrad94]

I'm not trying to be judgemental, just stating a personal preference. I've seen some really offensive tatoos lately. That doesn't mean I hate all tatoos. Military tatoos don't bother me or others of flowers, etc.

 

[Eric B]

I see what you are saying. But I think not showing respect is a symptom of a sociaty that is less polite and more self centered. You could make the same argument about not saying please or thank you. Or not holding the door. Or cutting in front of somebody in line.

The sad thing is that as a whole sociaty is becoming more self involved and less thinking of their fellow citizen. This leads to a whole range of what you would consider more serious problems. Not tipping the hat is a sign of this and is sad.

I would think that saying thank you and please and holding the door and not cutting in line are practical acts of politeness. If you're going through a door, why not hold it for the next person? If you're asking for something, say thank you and please, so it does not sound like you are demanding it rudely, or are not thankful. If someone else was waiting in line longer than you, it is basically "stealing" to jump in from of him. So you can even evoke God's Law in that one.

But many of these other rules (taking off the hat; no elbows on the table, etc) really are not as practical, (nobody really gains anything from them) yet much of old society demanded them rigorously, but disrepected fellow man in many other ways. Kids grew up seeing all this hypocrisy, and figured "why pretend"? Don't be polite at all. The old society set the stage for this by focusing on such impractical matters, while neglecting many more important issues (and not being able to tell the difference). Like I see the same thing happening in the Amish community, as they will come down hard on a man for beard length, while all sorts of abuse are being reported. You allow stuff like that to go on, even your society will crack and there will be a revolt. And all people will do is blame the changes and the "modern generation" bringing them, but nobody sees the hypocrisy that thrived before. The Muslims societies too have these cracks, with women trying to revolt in places.

Instead of championing everything "premodern" society ever did as right and godly, we should be pointing out that all have sinned. Else, people will just see all our beliefs as just some "premodern" relic.

 

[I Am Blessed 24]

Wow! What a stereotype!

But many of these other rules (taking off the hat; no elbows on the table, etc) really are not as practical, (nobody really gains anything from them) yet much of old society demanded them rigorously, but disrepected fellow man in many other ways. Kids grew up seeing all this hypocrisy, and figured "why pretend"? Don't be polite at all.

The old soceity set the stage for this by focusing on such impractical matters, while neglecting many more important issues.

Are you saying that everyone who had manners, paid attention to etiquette, and showed common courtesy were hypocrites?

I think not...

Common courtesy is never out of place.

 

[DHK]

So you essentially allow people to dishonor themselves, and in essence, the church? As their pastor, aren't you responsible for what happens? Would you allow a woman to be in your pulpit if her convictions allowed?

Are you being logical. I think not. Does the constitution allow for a female pastor? No, and neither does the Bible.
Perhaps a better parallel would be: Would you allow a person to be a member of your church if he doesn't tithe, and you believe in tithing? Or does he have to come to that place in his life spiritually where he will learn to tithe because of his relationship with Christ grows. (This is an example, not a debate on tithing.)

 

[webdog]

Are you being logical. I think not. Does the constitution allow for a female pastor? No, and neither does the Bible.

I'm using perfect logic. According to you the Bible doesn't allow a woman the choice to NOT wear head coverings, either. Why isn't that part of your constitution? Shouldn't there be some consistancy? If head covering are left up to the discretion of the women in your church...and you state that the Bible doesn't allow for such interpretation...what gives?

 

[Melanie]

I guess the question has been answered, men took off their hats as a sign of respect, women covered their heads because hair has been many women crowning glory as a mark of respect......sadly our society is so debased in what constitutes polite behaviour because of mixed messages.......:type:

 

[Eliyahu]

Many people during the time of Early Church scoffed at the Words of God. ( 2 Pet 3:3-4)
Even among the Christian believers today many scoff at the Words of God, by excusing or finding various pretexts for the disobedience.
Is the teaching on the Head-covering a very trivial thing?
Read this:

Luke 16:10
He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much: and he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much.

I know how those scoffers will be evaluated at the Judgment.

Matthew 5:
19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Matthew 25:
21 His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few(small) things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.

Do you think the believers who are faithful with the teachings of Head-Covering cannot be faithful with other teachings so much as the others who do not keep the commandments of Head-Covering?
Have you found that the Believers faithful with Head-Covering commit more sins of Murder and Adultery?
Where is such survey result?
Do you override the Commandments of the Bible by your own thinking?

Did Paul write 1 Corinthians 11:1-16 unnecessarily?

If one can ignore the Bible teaching on the Head-Covering, the other people can trample down the commandments on the Monogamy, the Prohibition on Fornication, the Homosexuality etc, in the similar way.

God is not MOCKED ( Gal 6:7), and He will judge us according to every behavior of ours on the basis of His Words in the Bible.

If you have any Biblical arguments against 1 Corinthians 11:1-16, present it now. Otherwise you will find no excuse for your choice on the Great Day.

On the other hand, God has blessed those people who kept this commandments faithfully, Among them some famous are ( during the short period of 150 years)

J.N. Darby( Bible Translator), George Muller( Father of Orphans) , Robert Chapman( His target was to witness Jesus Christ by living the life of Jesus Christ), CH McIntosh( Pentateuch), Erich Sauer( Dawn of World Redemption), David Livingstone( Africa), Joe Scrivener( What a friend we have in Jesus!), Robert Anderson( Daniel’s 70 weeks), Harry Ironside(Moody Memorial)….

[FONT=&#48148]Do the believers have more problems if they obey the commandments on Head-Covering? God knows![/FONT]

 

[webdog]

:BangHead: :BangHead: :BangHead: :BangHead:

 

[DHK]

:BangHead: :BangHead: :BangHead: :BangHead:

The Bible is clear Webdog. It is your choice whether you want to obey it or not.
You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.
The Word of God is preached. It is up to the people to obey it.
Or don't you believe it to be that way. If you have an invitation at the end of your service and ask all to bow their heads and close their eyes, do you go and literally jerk their heads down if some choose not to. Do you punch their eyelids if they are not shut. Do you use physical force if they are not obeying you? Just what do you do? If you are preaching on prayer, how do you force your congregation to pray and what do you do if they don't? Excommunicate them? You don't make a lot of sense Webdog.

 

[webdog]

The Bible is clear Webdog. It is your choice whether you want to obey it or not.
You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.
The Word of God is preached. It is up to the people to obey it.
Or don't you believe it to be that way. If you have an invitation at the end of your service and ask all to bow their heads and close their eyes, do you go and literally jerk their heads down if some choose not to. Do you punch their eyelids if they are not shut. Do you use physical force if they are not obeying you? Just what do you do? If you are preaching on prayer, how do you force your congregation to pray and what do you do if they don't? Excommunicate them? You don't make a lot of sense Webdog.

I would like to see what you would do if a woman walked up to the pulpit and started preaching :laugh:

If I recall, you stated you encourage all women to wear head covering. Since you are the pastor, why is this not a command? Are women allowed to wear pants in your church?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK: The Word of God is preached. It is up to the people to obey it.

HP: Time out!! Helloooo?:wavey: Reality check!:laugh:

Really now? “Up to the people?” Just what part of ‘dead’ do you not understand? How can a man that is dead do anything of his own volition without being granted the abilities to respond? How can anyone respond that has not been chosen as one of the elect, and if they have been chosen as one of the elect, what choice do they really have? Are you suggesting that one chosen of God could slip between the cracks of God’s omniscience and choose not to obey, and thereby foil God’s plan of election?

 

[Eliyahu]

Last night I ran across a friend at a mall. Some months ago I introduced him to one of the so-called PB church in the west Toronto.

He told me he is extremely happy with the fellowship in the church and confessed that he never expectd the fellowship would be so much good like that, and that he didn't know such church exist in the world.

He had a prodigal son but suddenly started to obey the teachings and accepted the Lord Jesus and is going to be baptized soon. His wife is very much happy with the church. Both couple are so much impressed with the change of their son.

You can check the teachings of the churches by checking the actual lives of theirs and the fellowship of the churches.

You better check the so-called PB's which perform the Head Covering as instructed in the Bible 1 Cor 11:1-16.

If you are interested, send me PM, then I will let you know the nearest PB assemblies. If you are not hard-headed, when you find any need to correct your way of worship and gatherings to conform to the Bible teachings, not to this World fashion ( Rom 12:2), you have to return to the good examples of NT churches.

When you start to obey the teachings of NT, you can clearly notice, the Holy Spirit works there! and your children will be changed enormously!

 

[Eric B]

Wow! What a stereotype!

Are you saying that everyone who had manners, paid attention to etiquette, and showed common courtesy were hypocrites?

I think not...

Common courtesy is never out of place.

No, no, no, not that everyone who "had manners" was a hypocrite. It is generations, or society in different time periods as a whole that are being compared here, not individuals, and people always think the past was better.
But the point was, society back then was very selective about what constituted "common courtesy". Some things they got right (holding doors), some of their "etiquette" were petty acts they made so important, while much of that old society could still treat other people badly based on them being different (physically, culturally, etc). So as Briony even said, there were mixed messages, and modern generations eventually declared that there are no absolutes at all.

 

[DeeJay]

No, no, no, not that everyone who "had manners" was a hypocrite. It is generations, or society in different time periods as a whole that are being compared here, not individuals, and people always think the past was better.
But the point was, society back then was very selective about what constituted "common courtesy". Some things they got right (holding doors), some of their "etiquette" were petty acts they made so important, while much of that old society could still treat other people badly based on them being different (physically, culturally, etc). So as Briony even said, there were mixed messages, and modern generations eventually declared that there are no absolutes at all.

Erics right here. So many people have been caught in their hypocricy preaching one thing and living another that the young generation is synical trusting their experiance and not somebodys words. They are synical (sp?) in that they expect everybody is a hypocrit until they prove themselfs. I like that actions speak much louder then words to them. Your words mean nothing to them until you prove them by you actions. They have been hurt to many times to trust people with out actions.

But the hypocricy is the problem not the manners. Our sociaty should work on their manners but also their meaningful actions.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Here is fodder for the list. Scripture does state that a man is not to pray with his head covered, neither are women to pray without their heads being covered. We are also instructed to pray without ceasing.

My question is, is it ever right for a man to wear a hat or a women to go about without a head covering, seeing that we are to pray without ceasing?

 

[DHK]

Here is fodder for the list. Scripture does state that a man is not to pray with his head covered, neither are women to pray without their heads being covered. We are also instructed to pray without ceasing.

My question is, is it ever right for a man to wear a hat or a women to go about without a head covering, seeing that we are to pray without ceasing?

A key verse is in 1Cor.7:1.
1 Corinthians 7:1 Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me:..."
Paul is addressing the church at Corinth, and the problems in the church that they wrote about. The mandate was for women to keep their head covered while in the church, when the assembly was gathered together for prayer and worship. It was not an "all-the-time" thing or command. It was a directive for the church. The command is very clear in the first five verses of 1Cor.11.

 

[DHK]

HP: Time out!! Helloooo?:wavey: Reality check!:laugh:

Really now? “Up to the people?” Just what part of ‘dead’ do you not understand? How can a man that is dead do anything of his own volition without being granted the abilities to respond? How can anyone respond that has not been chosen as one of the elect, and if they have been chosen as one of the elect, what choice do they really have? Are you suggesting that one chosen of God could slip between the cracks of God’s omniscience and choose not to obey, and thereby foil God’s plan of election?

What I am suggesting is: this is not a forum to debate Calvinism. Take it somewhere else.