Trend Toward Head Coverings for Women, 1 Cor 11.5

[Not_hard_to_find]

Thank God we are in the 21st century. I would not want to return to slavery even as it was in my time.

Cheers.

Jim

I do not understand the "my time." What was slavery like in your time?

As I see it, there is slavery today as there was a century ago. Literal slavery, not discriminatory look alikes.

My apologies in advance for the off topic.

 

[Jim1999]

Slavery goes beyond the norm of someone buying a people offshore, bringing them abroad and selling them into labour camps.

Women were also slaves. In Canada, before 1919 they weren't even a "person" legally. It took five brave women to take their case to the British Parliament and get themselves declared as "persons". They were subjected to factory labour under horrible conditions for a pittance...they are "only" women, one would hear. I think you get what I am saying, and I am only talking a few short years ago.....up into the 40's, and I would even take it later into the 50's.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[rlvaughn]

RL, seems the folks around BB don't like lists of questions. They ignored mine too.

J.D., I've try a few of yours.

2. Paul said that the woman ought to have "power" (i.e. a symbol of the man's authority) on her head. Is that a cultural, or moral, precept?
I suppose one could argue for one or the other -- or even both. Paul's arguments in favor of his position seem to me to be moral and not cultural.

3. How do church ladies today symbolize submission to their husbands?
If there is a Biblical way or teaching on the matter symbolically, it must the covering. I understand that some believe and argue for the long hair being that symbol (in fact, I was once influenced in that direction through reading John's grandfather), but I do not see that fitting the context, the word choices, or the argumentation.

5. If the "covering" that God's word says a woman ought to wear when praying or prophesying is not (a) a veil, or (2) a hat, or (3) long hair; then just what is it?
An interesting question. If the covering is figurative of another covering, what is that other covering? I don't know.

7. Long hair is a glory to the woman. Who should receive glory during worship?
GOD.

8. You don't find anything offensive about some guy sitting in church and staring at some girl's "long blond hair"?
I am giving the benefit of the doubt here and thinking probably there is a misunderstanding. Taken literally as I read it, I found it a "tad" discomforting.

10. Jim1999, you said "culture has changed". My question is, has it changed for the better?
I think culture in general has changed. But then again, there is probably not an American culture or a Canadian culture, etc. For example, the Amish, Muslims, some that don't speak English, etc., etc., maintain their own "culture within a culture". Even the Deep South culture is quite different from the nor'eastern culture. I'd say more of the changes are for the worse, but some for the better.

 

[Jim1999]

One important consideration is that within a custom can be a principle which does not change. We wear shoes or boots whereas they wore sandals or open shoes in biblical times. The foot remains covered or has sole support either way, hence the purpose of a shoe reamins despite cultural change.

This is true of some Christian principles...the surrounds may change, but the rule remains true in essence.

I think on the head covering issue, we are not talking so much about cultural change as we are about it being a local problem...

Cheers,

Jim

 

[rlvaughn]

RL, seems the folks around BB don't like lists of questions. They ignored mine too.

J.D., while looking over your quote of my point, I noticed the need to issue a slight correction.

1. What portions of the text of I Cor. 11:2-16 (and/or surrounding verses) indicate that Paul's teaching concerning the head covering is intended to be cultural?
2. If the teaching is cultural, what is its meaning for us today?
3. Is it applicable only to the Corinthians and only provides historical information for us in this day and time?
4. Is there a possibility that the practice is no longer valid, but the principle is?
5. If there is a valid applicable principle, what is it?

 

[old regular]

womens covering

The Old Regular Baptist have always believed that a womans true covering is her hair not shaven or shorn (uncut) there are many other groups that hold the same view,some denominations however go far enough to say if a woman cuts her hair,she is lost,and if she dies before it grows out she will go to hell.Our brethern are strict when it comes to the hair issue but we don 't believe it has anything to do with her eternal salvation but rather, there is a blessing in obeying the word of God. Bro.Slone