Headcover

[DHK]

Originally posted by mioque:

"My wife got her hair cut short."
''
Interesting detail, even in it's cut condition, your wives hair is still longer than that on any fresco or statue of a women of the era that I know of.
I'm an arthistorian, I've seen a great many Roman statues.

Is it still shorter?

1Co 11:15

Verse 15. "It is a glory to her." It is an ornament and adorning. The same instinctive promptings of nature which make it proper for a man to wear short hair, make it proper that the woman should suffer hers to grow long.

"For a covering." Margin, Veil. It is given to her as a sort of natural veil, and to indicate the propriety of her wearing a veil. It answered the purposes of a veil when it was suffered to grow long, and to spread over the shoulders and over parts of the face, before the arts of dress were invented or needed. There may also be an allusion here to the fact that the hair of women naturally grows longer than that of men. See Rosenmuller. The value which eastern females put on their long hair may be learned from the fact that when Ptolemy Euergetes, king of Egypt, was about to march against Seleucus Callinicus, his queen Berenice vowed, as the most precious sacrifice which she could make, to cut off and consecrate her hair if he returned in safety.

"The eastern ladies," says Harmer, "are remarkable for the length and the great number of the tresses of their hair. The men there, on the contrary, wear very little hair on their heads." Lady M. W. Montague thus speaks concerning the hair of the women: "Their hair hangs at full length behind, divided into tresses, braided with pearl or riband, which is always in great quantity. I never saw in my life so many fine heads of hair. In one lady's I have counted one hundred and ten of these tresses, all natural; but it must be owned that every kind of beauty is more common here than with us." The men there, on the contrary, shave all the hair off their heads, excepting one lock; and those that wear hair are thought effeminate. Both these particulars are mentioned by Chardin, who says they are agreeable to the custom of the East: "The men are shaved; the women nourish their hair with great fondness, which they lengthen by tresses and tufts of silk, down to the heels. The young men who wear their hair in the East are looked upon as effeminate and infamous."

Albert Barnes Commentary

DHK

 

[mioque]

DHK
"Is it still shorter?"
''
Female hair on Classical Greek/Roman statuery is universally longer than male hair. Female hairdo of the period is often rather complex making it difficult to determine exact length. As a good guestimate, worn loose it covers the shoulderblades.

 

[mioque]

The Albert Barnes commentary.
The first alinea contains 2 statements that I suspect aren't factually true.
1. Women's hair growing faster than that of men.
2.Berenice shaving her long hair. Upperclass Egyptians of both sexes traditionally shaved themselves bald and wore wigs. This was done because of the climate and all the vermin

The second alinea gives an overly romanticized description of the situation in the 19th century.
Romanticized to the point of uselessness.

 

[DHK]

I myself go frequently to eatern, and mid-eastern nations. Frequently do I see women people with their hair way down past their waist, some having down to their knees, or even a little below. This is not romanticism. It is culture that has been passed down from centuries. It points to a principle that long hair is a glory to a woman, while long hair on a man is a shame to him, just as the Bible says it. Why is western culture and so-called "western civilized nations" trying to teach contrary to what the Bible clearly teaches as right? Is it because they don't want to obey Scriptural teaching.
DHK

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by DHK:
I myself go frequently to eatern, and mid-eastern nations. Frequently do I see women people with their hair way down past their waist, some having down to their knees, or even a little below. This is not romanticism. It is culture that has been passed down from centuries.

Of interest:

In countries where women have been traditionally seen as second class citizens, it is a status symbol for a woman to cut her hair to shoulder length, or shorter, when they enter the workforce. It symbolizes the modern and successful woman. The woman with shorter hair is considered sexy. Since the hair they're cutting is often a foot in length or longer, they are able to sell their hair by the inch. Meanwhile, in western countries, where women have not been second class citizens for at least two generations, having long hair is considered sexy. The biggest market for hair extensions is the United States.

Interesting, don't you think, that eastern country women are cutting off their hair and exporting it in an effort to be beautiful, while western women are importing hair and getting extensions in an effort to be beautiful. Both desire the same thing: what the other already has.

 

[mioque]

DHK
"Frequently do I see women people with their hair way down past their waist,"
''
Most Middle-Eastern women having long hair does not surprise me, what does surprise me is you getting to see that hair. That is what headcovering is supposed to be for.
Thanks to the shampoo industry having long hair, without resorting to wigs, or looking like a Rastafarian has become an easily attainable goal for a much larger percentage of the women in the Middle East.

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by mioque:
DHK
"Frequently do I see women people with their hair way down past their waist,"
''
Most Middle-Eastern women having long hair does not surprise me, what does surprise me is you getting to see that hair. That is what headcovering is supposed to be for.
Thanks to the shampoo industry having long hair, without resorting to wigs, or looking like a Rastafarian has become an easily attainable goal for a much larger percentage of the women in the Middle East.

No, in a Muslim country, not everyone is forced to wear a Burqa (where every part of the body is covered) such as the Afghans had to do under Taliban rule. Most require their woman to wear a "headcovering" which is exactly what the word means--a covering for the "head." It is usually a scarf, and does not cover ALL the hair which is long flowing.
DHK

 

[mioque]

DHK
I've been to Oman and Egypt and I'm aware of the fact that the way the ladies are forced to dress in Afghanistan is not the norm.

The most important purpose of headcovering in Islam is to cover a women's hair. In Christianity you may be covering your head for God, in Islam you are doing it to make sure strange men don't lust after you.

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by mioque:
DHK
I've been to Oman and Egypt and I'm aware of the fact that the way the ladies are forced to dress in Afghanistan is not the norm.

The most important purpose of headcovering in Islam is to cover a women's hair. In Christianity you may be covering your head for God, in Islam you are doing it to make sure strange men don't lust after you.

If you have been reading the media, you may be aware that the Muslims in Canada are trying to bring in their own Sharia law. The Jerusalem Post recently had an article in which it said that the stated goal of the Muslims in Canada was to make Canada an Islamic nation.
In my city alone (just less than a million), there are 35,000 Muslims from various countries. Muslims from Egypt dress different from India and Pakistan. There are Muslims from Jordan, Turkey, Iran, and various African nations. The scarves differ from nation or culture to culture. The only thing that remains a constant is when the husband requires his wife to wear a burqah which covers every square inch of the woman's body. This is only common now in nations that have a strict code of Sharia law, as did the Talibans.
Many of the Muslims from Pakistan and India come from an area known as the Punjab. They wear a typical Punjabi dress called a shalwar qameez with a scarf called a dupatta. The dupatta is generally narrow but long in length. Its purpose is not so much to cover the hair (as it really doesn't), but it is a sign of purity. From what the Muslim women have explained to my wife, a woman without wearing a dupatta is looked upon as being "immoral."

Christians from the same part of the world dress the same way, use the same scarf, but as you say--for a different purpose. They cover their heads when they pray, when in church. Otherwise they usually just drape it around their shoulders.
DHK

 

[mioque]

"If you have been reading the media, you may be aware that the Muslims in Canada are trying to bring in their own Sharia law."
''
At the moment you can get a dispute arbitrated according to Sharia law in Canada, if both parties agree to that beforehand.

"In my city alone (just less than a million), there are 35,000 Muslims from various countries."
''
Overhere we have about +/- 45.000 Moslims for each million inhabitants

"This is only common now in nations that have a strict code of Sharia law, as did the Talibans."
''
The Afghani burqah is beyond strict Sharia law.
http://www.islamic.co.uk/sharia/main.asp

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by mioque:
"If you have been reading the media, you may be aware that the Muslims in Canada are trying to bring in their own Sharia law."

That's not true at all. They're trying to get the right to arbitration in accordance with Sharia law. Arbitration is done by private parties. Here in the US, Jews have Rabbinnic courts to settle arbitration among Jews, and in my area of the country, there are several Christian orgainzations that will settle disputes amongst Christians in accordance with scriptural guidelines. Those who claim that Canadian Muslims are trying to institute sharia law as a matter of public policy are completely false, and either ignorant of the facts, or purposefully misrepresenting the facts.

 

[mioque]

Johnv
That's exactly what I have been telling DHK, whom I quoted in the part of my post you quoted.

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Johnv:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by mioque:
"If you have been reading the media, you may be aware that the Muslims in Canada are trying to bring in their own Sharia law."

That's not true at all. They're trying to get the right to arbitration in accordance with Sharia law. Arbitration is done by private parties. Here in the US, Jews have Rabbinnic courts to settle arbitration among Jews, and in my area of the country, there are several Christian orgainzations that will settle disputes amongst Christians in accordance with scriptural guidelines. Those who claim that Canadian Muslims are trying to institute sharia law as a matter of public policy are completely false, and either ignorant of the facts, or purposefully misrepresenting the facts. </font>[/QUOTE]The Jews and Catholics have quite a different culture than the Musims. It is naive to think that a Muslim woman could appeal what she considers an unfair decision and expect to win. In fact that would never happen. A woman would alway be compelled "to agree" with whatever decision her family has made for her. That is their culture. It won't change just because they are in another country. This is one of the reasons the ulema want to bring it Sharia Law in--to help preserve that culture, which in part is control of women (or loss of women's rights).

2/07/2004: Former NDP attorney-general Marion Boyd has been appointed to review procedures that would include the use of Islamic law to settle family disputes, the Ontario government has announced. (Toronto Star)

The review will examine the 1991 Arbitration Act, which allows religious groups to resolve civil family disputes within their faith, providing that all parties involved consent to the process and the results conform to Canadian law and human rights codes.

Other religious groups, including Catholics and Jews, already use the act.

Boyd's appointment was prompted by plans of the Islamic Institute for Civil Justice to start applying a form of sharia law later this year.

Several legal and women's groups have expressed concern that the 1,400-year-old sharia law is flawed because it does not view women as equal.

"I want to make sure we are getting this right," Premier Dalton McGuinty said earlier this month when he promised a review of the Arbitration Act.

Boyd's report is expected by September.

Toronto Star, 26 June 2004

Canada: Sharia Law

DHK

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by DHK:
The Jews and Catholics have quite a different culture than the Musims. It is naive to think that a Muslim woman could appeal what she considers an unfair decision and expect to win.

Binding arbitration is not compulsory. It's voluntary. For me, personally, I would never submit to binding arbitration of a faith-based arbiter, even if it was a Cristian arbiter. I would only accept secular arbitration, or take the matter to civil courts.

 

[Baptistas]

The response usually goes something like this:

"That's just an outdated tradition of man", or "if you believe like that, you're just being legal". Yes, you've heard this type of response or maybe you've even said things like this yourself. However, is this God's opinion? What does He think about these subjects?

What's God's Point of View
The following is meant to give you, the reader, clear insight into God's point of view. Does He think that such questions should be answered based on Christian tradition or not?

However, before we begin, certain things must be understood:

To the nonchalant inquirer, understanding this question will ever remain hidden. Only a sincere seeker will see the truth that lies below the surface of what seems to be outdated traditions of men.

Snipped main portion of message. Please follow link to read text!

The Bottom Line
If your heart doesn't understand what I've written so far, what can I do? I certainly have no power to open a mind that God has closed and kept blind.

Look http://rusbaptist.stunda.org/engl/headcovering.htm

Edited because of size. Please follow link to read this article.

[ September 02, 2004, 12:31 PM: Message edited by: dianetavegia ]

 

[DHK]

Excellent post Baptistas!

 

[John3v36]

Yes very good insight

 

[7-Kids]

I like it also

 

[John3v36]

bump