|
Author
|
Topic: God bless the women!
|
bluefrog
unregistered
|
posted
Very Good.
So that's where them little critters went ?
Their mother and I are frustrated parents, and yes it makes ya sorta jumpy. rivet
IP: Logged | 
|
|
Michael Harrison
Advanced Member
Member # 6801
|
posted
I'm raising tadpoles! I have been collecting rain water to water the garden and the grape vines, and those little boogers got into one of my tanks. But they haven't been growing. I thought that they would have been grown and gone now. With the cold weather however, I don't know if they will make it. Same thing happened last year.
By the way bluefrog, you need to be careful. Before you know it someone might accuse you of being jumpy!
Posts: 3273 | From: Charlotte N.C. | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
|
|
bluefrog
unregistered
|
posted
I can cut my hair or let it grow long and so can my wife. Makes no difference to God. I can believe in him, but I can also believe that I am the prettiest frog on the pond but that won't matter to God any more than my believing in Him unless I do something about it like turn my self over to him. I can share my flies with all the other frogs on the pond or sing beautiful songs to them, stuff like that, but that won't get me a pad in heaven. I can tell all the other frogs about God, I can look after their tadpolls for them and really neat stuff I am sure God would like but still no pad in heaven. I can be cool but cool just IS, It is when I make a difference that matters. What I wear, do, think, comb my hair, shave, sing, nuttin...can earn me a pad in heaven. But if I repent, open my heart to Him and ask His Grace is what does it.
IP: Logged |
|
|
Eden
unregistered
|
posted
Michael Harrison wrote quote:
But it is the act of 'believing' that turns into salvation, not the act of 'doing' one thing or another.
becauseHElives answered quote:
very true but just as true is true believing causes true doing the will of Yahweh!
yes, that is true, but we are often still so prideful that we turn your saying around and instead of your quote quote:
"very true but just as true is true believing causes true doing the will of Yahweh!"
, we end up thinking (again) that these things are a requirement for salvation, and that they are NOT.
"Doing the will of Yahweh" is required for REWARDS once one is INSIDE the family camp of God, and once one has ALREADY COMPLETED the BELIEVING that alone is required for SALVATION.
The trouble with us is that we are so evil that we just "love" to turn that around and say or act as if "these things ARE required for salvation", what we call "legalism", as if "I am required to DO something for my salvation".
It is fairly easy for the soul to trap us back into thinking that this "doing of the will of Yahweh" is REQUIRED for salvation, and that is absolutely not the case.
Being under the law means "I have to DO something for God", while being under grace means, "God does something for me".
It is a blessed thing to discover that I do not have to do anything to please God for salvation, except believe in Jesus. How easy that is!
Romans 7:4
Wherefore, my brethren, you also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ ...
Romans 6:14
For sin shall not have dominion over you: for you are not under the law, but under grace.
Romans 6:15
What then? Shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.
Being under grace, we are thankful for what God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit have done for us, by saving us, and then we try to behave in the family of God, you know?
love, Edenstein, von de wildernessstein
"Luke 3:8 For God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham."
IP: Logged |
|
|
Michael Harrison
Advanced Member
Member # 6801
|
posted
Well, thanks for the echo. After all (you two) I did say:
- Php 1:6 Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ:
quote:
quote:
This might well mean that you will be baptised in the course of His will being performed in you. But HE does not say to go be baptized if you would be saved.
Perhaps you did not see that? Hummmm?
Luk 14:8 When thou art bidden of any man to a wedding, sit not down in the highest room; lest a more honourable man than thou be bidden of him;
Posts: 3273 | From: Charlotte N.C. | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
|
|
becauseHElives
Advanced Member
Member # 87
|
posted
quote:
But it is the act of 'believing' that turns into salvation, not the act of 'doing' one thing or another
very true but just as true is true believing causes true doing the will of Yahweh!
the true believer wants to do what ever pleases Yahweh....
I can promise you all the thief on the cross would have with the eunuch who said " Look, there's some water. What keeps me from being baptized?" if his circumstances had been where he could, he would have been baptized!
--------------------
Strive to enter in at the strait gate:for many, I say unto you will seek to enter in, and shall not be able. ( Luke 13:24 )
Posts: 4578 | From: Southeast Texas | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Eden
unregistered
|
posted
Michael Harrison wrote quote:
After all, people were going around saying that "You need to be circumcised."
But it is the act of 'believing' that turns into salvation, not the act of 'doing' one thing or another. Else, where does it stop? There are denominations who say you must take the Lord's supper. There are others who say you have to be in church on Sunday if you are able. So.....
The thief could not do much since he was saved on the cross, so that is basic salvation. And this basic salvation can apparenlty be obtained without water baptism and without hair covering, etc.
But then there are rewards. Children are adopted into the family camp of God, and having come out Satan's kingdom of the rat, at first these adopted children feel unloved and may act out, and all that.
But with training from the Word of God, these adopted children begin to become respectful, gentle, and helpful sons and daughters of God who help out around the family camp, with whatever needs to be done.
And the Father gives rewards to the sons and daughters who make a good effort and have good results:
Matthew 25:23
Then his lord said to him, Well done, good and faithful servant; you have been faithful over a few things, I will make you ruler over many things: enter into the joy of your lord.
Revelation 22:12
And, behold, I come quickly; and My reward is with Me, to give every man according as his work shall be.
Luke 19
16 Then came the first, saying, Lord, your pound has gained ten pounds.
17 And he said to him, Well, you good servant: because you have been faithful in a very little, have authority over ten cities.
18 And the second came, saying, Lord, your pound has gained five pounds.
19 And he said likewise to him, Be you over five cities.
Matthew 18:4
Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven.
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.
1 Corinthians 11:10
For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head, because of the angels.
Because of the angels? What does that mean then?
On the other hand, Michael Harrison wrote quote:
After all, people were going around saying that "You need to be circumcised."
But it is the act of 'believing' that turns into salvation, not the act of 'doing' one thing or another. Else, where does it stop? There are denominations who say you must take the Lord's supper. There are others who say you have to be in church on Sunday if you are able. So.....
It's not mandatory for ADOPTION into the family of God, but it may become CUSTOMARY once one is INSIDE and PART OF the family camp of God...should one choose to accept this mission...
love, Edenstein von ze Zilpah or ze Bilhah, by ze vater Jakob von ze Judah.
IP: Logged |
|
|
Michael Harrison
Advanced Member
Member # 6801
|
posted
- 1Co 11:15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.
That has to do with having her head covered in church.
...........~ ![[Cross]](graemlins/cross.gif) ![[Prayer]](graemlins/prayer.gif) ~..........
Then: yahswey, it is unevenly applied. After all, can a man be saved without believing on Christ? Every man who is saved, believed the belief of surrender to His will, which is to receive the gift of salvation, and that was without baptism. This is exactly what Paul was preaching about when he launched on circumcision. After all, people were going around saying that "You need to be circumcised."
But it is the act of 'believing' that turns into salvation, not the act of 'doing' one thing or another. Else, where does it stop? There are denominations who say you must take the Lord's supper. There are others who say you have to be in church on Sunday if you are able. So.....
- Php 1:6 Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ:
This might well mean that you will be baptised in the course of His will being performed in you. But HE does not say to go be baptized if you would be saved. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
And who can we baptize? After all, water baptism is only symbolic. But being baptized into Him is something only He can do! That will not happen unless we believe.
And besides, people get into arguments about whether one's baptism is sufficient. Because some sprinkle, and others dunk. And according to the one, sprinkling is not enough. To them you are not saved if you are not dunked. And another might require that one goes under in river water only. But there you go. Legalism for them equates to what one 'does' in order to be saved. Of all men, these will be the most miserable on that fateful day, for they believed that it was what they 'did' that counted.
Posts: 3273 | From: Charlotte N.C. | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
|
|
yahsway
Advanced Member
Member # 3738
|
posted
bluefrog, no i do not feel that no water baptisim =no salvation. I understand there are circumstances where water baptism can be impossible.
Posts: 1238 | From: Tennessee | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
bluefrog
unregistered
|
posted
becauseHElives...nice book. I tried to tell you the same thing so I don't know why you attempt to approach it the way you did.
yahsway...I agree that Baptism is a commandment, but there are cases where it is impossible. Do you feel that no baptism, no salvation ?
eden...your reference to power on her head is simply saying she has control of what to do. Paul went on to say that hair is a covering. He also went further and said being a skin head was sorta kookie so cover it.
Me thinks we are trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill.
rivit
IP: Logged |
|
|
Eden
unregistered
|
posted
Eden had written: quote:
Like water baptism, head covering is a signal to God and to the angels by which the believer signals that "she submits to God's hierarchy", unlike Lucifer.
And WildB answered: quote:
Wow! please post your scripture?
I thought this scripture is the one that applied:
1 Corinthians 11:10
For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head, because of the angels.
But I have to admit, WildB, that the above verse says the "woman should have POWER on her head" and that says NOTHING about "hair".
We had a long thread on this subject before and I can't remember now "with which final conclusion from that thread I finally ended up siding with", so "that's all".
love, Edenstein, von ze Bilhah or ze Zilpah
IP: Logged |
|
|
yahsway
Advanced Member
Member # 3738
|
posted
MH, only as required by our Master Yeshua from Matt 28:19-21
"Gotherefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to Observe ALL things that I commanded you;....
And I would say that Baptism would be one of those things He commanded
Posts: 1238 | From: Tennessee | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Michael Harrison
Advanced Member
Member # 6801
|
posted
Uhm, yahswey!
quote:
On the one hand baptisim is a sign of the covenant. on the other, it is the means by which people enter into that covenant.
In the covenantal view, baptism serves the same purpose for New Test. believers that circumcision did for old test believers.
For the Jews, circumcision was the external and visable sign that they were within the covenant that God had established with Abraham.
Converts to Judaism also had to undergo this rite.
Baptism is a 'sign' of the covenant. Well enough said. But in that it is a 'sign', that means it is 'symbolism'. So you ended up with this comment following the above:
quote:
But now under the New Covenant, baptism instead of circumcision is required.
You have made a statement fully in support of legalism. For it is not a requirement to be baptized. It is ceremony which connects people under His banner, nothing more, as are so many other things.
Posts: 3273 | From: Charlotte N.C. | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
|
|
becauseHElives
Advanced Member
Member # 87
|
posted
1 Cor 11:10, is not a scripture that proves the point of non covering...
all scripture must agree...
you can't build doctrine on one verse....
Head Coverings and the Body of the Messiah
The subject of head coverings has been a source of much confusion for many believers in the Messiah. However, in this study it will be evident that the reason why it is a source of confusion is because of a lack of understanding as to its purpose. Many have written studies which examine historical data or various theories which attempt to explain the head covering issue. But we can learn why women should cover their heads and why men should not cover their heads simply by looking at the reasons given in 1 Corinthians and studying out those reasons in other scriptures.
Introduction
Let's start with the first verse in 1 Corinthians:
1 Corinthians 11:1-2 Imitate me, just as I also imitate Messiah. 2 Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you.
In the opening verses of 1 Corinthians 11, we see that Paul encouraged the Corinthians to imitate him as he imitates Yahushua. Of course, there is nothing wrong with imitating anyone who is imitating Yahushua since anyone doing so is actually imitating Yahushua.
In the second verse, the Corinthians are encouraged to keep the "traditions" that were delivered to them by Paul. Since a good portion of the following verses will be discussing the head covering, it is likely that the head covering is one of those "traditions."
Some have suggested that since Paul chose to call it a "tradition" rather than calling it a "commandment," and we find no commandment in the law of Yahweh regarding the head coverings (with the exception of the priests), we are free to ignore the principles given in 1 Corinthians 11. However, there are several problems with this.
First of all, the Greek word translated "traditions" here is #3862 "paradosis" which literally means "transmission" or "something given over." There are some instances where it is used negatively, such as in Mark 7:9:
Mark 7:9 He said to them, "All too well you reject the commandment of Elohim, that you may keep your tradition.
But in other instances, this word is used very differently:
2 Thessalonians 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle.
2 Thessalonians 3:6 But we command you, brethren, in the name of our Master Yahushua Messiah, that you withdraw from every brother who walks disorderly and not according to the tradition which he received from us.
Notice that Yahushua's name is invoked when commanding the Thessalonian brethren to withdraw from every brother who doesn't keep to the "paradosis" of the 1st century believers in Yahushua. The "paradosis" of the 1st century believers that Yahushua Himself sent out unto the world were not traditions of men that could be ignored and set aside. The "paradosis" of the body of Messiah were expected to be kept.
So obviously, there was more to the "paradosis" of the early believers than just a commandment, idea or doctrine of men. So important was the need to keep the "paradosis" that was given by the apostles, anyone straying from them was cut off from the assembly.
The idea that we are free to ignore any commandment given in the "New Testament" is completely without basis. Those who choose to ignore the principles given regarding the head covering in 1 Corinthians 11 on the basis that these things were not covered in the Torah/'Old Testament'/Law of Yahweh are not being consistent in their belief.
For instance, everyone agrees that we should obey the commandment to be baptized in Yahushua's name for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38), but you won't find this specifically commanded in the law of Yahweh.
We also follow Yahushua's "new commandment" to "love one another as I have loved you" and follow Yahushua's admonitions to "Judge not, that you be not judged" and "do not cast your pearls before swine" along with Paul's admonitions to "pray without ceasing" and Kepha/Peter's admonition to "cherish and nourish" our wives. But I don't know of anyone who would argue that we shouldn't follow these things on the basis that we don't see an identical commandment in Yahweh's law.
The truth is, we should obey all of scripture and not assume we can ignore any of it. Yahweh's word should be heeded regardless of what year Yahweh inspired the words.
Now in the case of the head covering, any man who chooses not to heed the "paradosis" of the head covering is not only ignoring scripture, they are also dishonoring Yahushua:
1 Corinthians 11:3-4 But I want you to know that the head of every man is Messiah, the head of woman is man, and the head of Messiah is Elohim. 4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonors his head.
So we need to be sure that we are not dishonoring Yahushua. Anyone who dishonors Yahushua is also dishonoring Yahweh the Father:
John 5:23b He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.
But why does it dishonor Yahushua when a man covers his head while praying or prophesying?
Finding out exactly why a man dishonors Yahushua by covering his head while praying/prophesying is very important. Thankfully, we don't have to look very far. We are given the reason why in verse 7:
1 Corinthians 11:7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of Elohim; but woman is the glory of man.
So the reason why men should not cover their heads while praying/prophesying is because man is the image and glory of Elohim. Therefore, it is evident that Yahweh desires to see His own glory during the times that we pray or prophesy. This is given as the reason as to why a man "indeed ought not to cover his head".
Therefore, the principle given here is this: Do not cover up the glory of Yahweh while in His presence. Doing so dishonors Yahushua the Messiah.
Of course, none of us want to dishonor Yahushua. But in what way does a man praying or prophesying with a covered head dishonor Yahushua? This is an important question.
The Image and Glory of Yahweh
It is important to concentrate on the words written in this portion of the study in order to grasp the full meaning of the head covering subject, and why a man should not cover his head but a woman should. We will work from this foundation to discover the reason why a woman should cover their head. Unless we really understand why a man dishonors Yahushua when covering His head, we will not really understand the purpose of the head covering.
Firstly, we know that Adam was created in the image and glory of Yahweh.
Genesis 1:26 Then Elohim said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth."
At this time, all was perfect and Adam was indeed in the image of Elohim. However, as we all know, Adam sinned. Because of Adam's sin, man's image and glory is no longer the true image and glory of Elohim. After all, the image of Elohim is a righteous image, and His glory is a righteous glory. But since we are sinners, we are no longer in that image and glory:
Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of Elohim,
So how can a sinner be restored and once again become the image and glory of Elohim? Only through Yahushua the Perfect One who was indeed the image and glory of Yahweh:
Hebrews 1:1-3 Elohim, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, 2 has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds; 3 who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high
So Yahushua is the true image and glory of Elohim. Yahushua never sinned and fell short of His glory. For this reason, we need Him to restore us to the image of Elohim again.
Notice that Hebrews 1:3 said that Yahushua is the 'brightness' of Elohim's glory. There are also a number of places Yahushua is called "the Word."
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with Elohim, and the Word was Elohim.
John 1:14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
Revelation 19:13 He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of Elohim.
So He is the Word and He is also the glory of the Father. We see other parallels in scripture where the word of Yahweh is called a lamp, a light:
Psalm 119:105 Your word is a lamp to my feet And a light to my path.
And continuing that thought we see Yahushua saying:
John 8:12 Then Yahushua spoke to them again, saying, "I am the light of the world. He who follows Me shall not walk in darkness, but have the light of life."
So Yahushua is the light, the brightness of Yahweh's glory. He is the "Word" and the express image of Elohim fully.
Adam, the first man, was created in the image of Yahweh but he sinned. Yahushua, who came into the world as the 'second' Adam did not sin.
Romans 5:14-15 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come. 15 But the free gift is not like the offense. For if by the one man's offense many died, much more the grace of Elohim and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Yahushua Messiah, abounded to many.
Through Yahushua, it is no longer we (Adam) who live, but Messiah who lives in us. Thus, through Yahushua we are restored as the true, undefiled image and glory of Elohim:
Galatians 2:20 "I have been crucified with Messiah; it is no longer I who live, but Messiah lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of Elohim, who loved me and gave Himself for me.
Since Yahushua is living in us, Yahweh does not see our own corrupted image when we pray or prophesy, but He sees "the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person," Yahushua the Messiah IN US.
So while praying and prophesying, the man must be sure not to cover his head, for in Yahushua he is the image and glory of Yahweh. When we pray, we need to let the image and glory of Elohim (Yahushua) be uncovered. Otherwise we are dishonoring our Head (Yahushua):
1 Corinthians 11:4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonors his head.
1 Corinthians 11:7 - For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of YAHWEH:
So we must not be in Yahweh's presence (during prayer and prophesying) without the image and glory of Elohim seen upon us. We need the glory of Elohim through Yahushua the Messiah, for it is through Him that we are saved and it is through Him we are restored to the righteous image of Elohim that was originally created.
Hebrews 10:19 Therefore, brethren, having boldness to enter the Holiest by the blood of Yahushua, 20 by a new and living way which He consecrated for us, through the veil, that is, His flesh, 21 and having a High Priest over the house of Yahweh, 22 let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. 23 Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful.
Notice that it says we enter the holiest by the blood of Yahushua, through the veil, that is, His flesh. If we are looking for a veil to put on when coming to Yahweh in prayer, we need to look no further than Yahushua the Messiah. There is a reason that the veil to the holy of holies (wherein lies the mercy seat) was split in two.
In light of these things, let's now review the verses which said a man should not cover his head:
1 Corinthians 11:3 - But I would have you know, that the head of every man is the Messiah; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of the Messiah is YAHWEH.
1 Corinthians 11:4 - Every man praying or prophesying, having his (physical) head covered, dishonoureth his (Spiritual) head.
1 Corinthians 11:7 - For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of YAHWEH:
So it should be pretty clear as to why it dishonors Yahushua when a man chooses to cover his head. He is rejecting the work of the High Priest, Yahushua, who entered to holiest place in the heavens to atone for us with His own blood. Yahushua came to this earth and died for our sins so that He might be raised again, enter the Holiest place with His own blood and live in us, a people who don't even consider ourselves to be alive, but consider Yahushua to live and reign in us. To put some artificial cover on our heads is to disregard the work of Yahushua in us. That's how we are dishonoring Him. Yahushua's veil is all we really need.
So, in conclusion, any man covering his head while in prayer or during prophesying is dishonoring Yahushua the Messiah, the One whose glory should be made manifest unto Yahweh. Many give their reasons as to why a man should or should not cover his head. But the scriptures give us the reason. We only need to dig a little deeper and then we can grasp the full meaning.
What about the "Old Testament?"
Upon reading what is often called the "Old testament,", we see some examples of men covering their heads.
On the surface, it might seem contradictory for 1 Corinthians to say that men ought not cover their heads, while it is written in the Law that the High Priests 'must' cover their heads. The law of Yahweh teaches that the High Priest wore a miter (Heb. #4701 mitsnepheth):
Exodus 29:6 (KJV) And thou shalt put the mitre upon his head, and put the holy crown upon the mitre.
Leviticus 16:4 (KJV) He shall put on the holy linen coat, and he shall have the linen breeches upon his flesh, and shall be girded with a linen girdle, and with the linen mitre (mitsnepheth) shall he be attired: these are holy garments; therefore shall he wash his flesh in water, and so put them on.
So we see that the High Priest wore a type of head covering, (Heb. #4021 migba`ah). This was not commanded to be worn every time the priest would pray his personal prayers or prophesy, but it was commanded to be worn whenever he performs his priestly duties in the tabernacle/temple:
Exodus 28:43 "They shall be on Aaron and on his sons when they come into the tabernacle of meeting, or when they come near the altar to minister in the holy place, that they do not incur iniquity and die. It shall be a statute forever to him and his descendants after him.
Scripture teaches us that Yahushua is also a high priest, but of the heavenly temple:
Hebrews 5:9-10 And having been perfected, He became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him, 10 called by Elohim as High Priest "according to the order of Melchizedek,"
Hebrews 8:3-5 For every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices. Therefore it is necessary that this One also have something to offer. 4 For if He were on earth, He would not be a priest, since there are priests who offer the gifts according to the law; 5 who serve the copy and shadow of the heavenly things, as Moses was divinely instructed when he was about to make the tabernacle. For He said, "See that you make all things according to the pattern shown you on the mountain."
Notice it says that if Yahushua were on the earth, He would not be a priest of the earthly tabernacle. This is because He is the High Priest of the heavenly tabernacle, "according to the order of Melchizedek." So the sons of Aaron are the priests of the earthly tabernacle, and Yahushua is the High Priest of the heavenly tabernacle.
The priesthood and tabernacle on the earth are a "copy and shadow" of the heavenly priesthood and tabernacle. So as a part of Yahweh's desire for it to be a copy and shadow, the priests were commanded to wear linen garments--including a linen head covering.
Leviticus 16:4 "He shall put the holy linen tunic and the linen trousers on his body; he shall be girded with a linen sash, and with the linen turban he shall be attired. These are holy garments. Therefore he shall wash his body in water, and put them on.
What did the linen represent? According to scripture, linen is a symbol for righteousness:
Revelation 19:7-8 "Let us be glad and rejoice and give Him glory, for the marriage of the Lamb has come, and His wife has made herself ready." 8 And to her it was granted to be arrayed in fine linen, clean and bright, for the fine linen is the righteous acts of the saints.
A similar scripture is found in Isaiah 61:
Isaiah 61:10 I will greatly rejoice in Yahweh, My soul shall be joyful in my Elohim; For He has clothed me with the garments of salvation, He has covered me with the robe of righteousness, As a bridegroom decks himself with ornaments, And as a bride adorns herself with her jewels.
And earlier in the 61st chapter of Isaiah it says:
Isaiah 61:1 "The Spirit of Yahweh Elohim is upon Me, Because Yahweh has anointed Me To preach good tidings to the poor; He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted, To proclaim liberty to the captives, And the opening of the prison to those who are bound; 2 To proclaim the acceptable year of Yahweh, And the day of vengeance of our Elohim; To comfort all who mourn, 3 To console those who mourn in Zion, To give them beauty (Heb. #6287 Pe'er) for ashes, The oil of joy for mourning, The garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness; That they may be called trees of righteousness, The planting of Yahweh, that He may be glorified."
When Yahushua returns, His bride will receive "beauty" for ashes, that we might be called "trees of righteousness" and glorify Yahweh. The Hebrew word translated "beauty" in this verse is "Pe'er." It's interesting that the same Hebrew word is used to describe Ezekiel's turban:
Ezekiel 24:17 "Sigh in silence, make no mourning for the dead; bind your turban (Heb. #6287 Pe'er) on your head, and put your sandals on your feet; do not cover your lips, and do not eat man's bread of sorrow."
We can gather from all of these scriptures that the linen turban specifically is a symbolic representation of having righteousness upon our heads. Ashes were often put upon the heads of those who were in great distress (2sam 13:19). Yahushua said that He would give us "beauty" instead. So rather than having ashes on our heads, we will have something glorious. Perhaps the ashes (created by burning) represent what we might have had without Yahushua the Messiah: death and damnation by burning.
So it can be clearly seen that the priestly head covering represents righteousness. Because the priesthood and tabernacle on the earth is a "copy and shadow" of the heavenly priesthood and tabernacle, the linen garments were given to represent the righteousness of the heavenly High Priest, Yahushua the Messiah. Again, this was only necessary during the times that they functioned in the tabernacle or temple area:
Exodus 28:43 "They shall be on Aaron and on his sons when they come into the tabernacle of meeting, or when they come near the altar to minister in the holy place, that they do not incur iniquity and die. It shall be a statute forever to him and his descendants after him.
Thus when the High Priest entered the temple and went beyond the veil into the most holy place, he would need to have a representation of righteousness upon him or He would die.
So is there anything contradictory here? I don't see anything at all. If a temple were functioning today, the priests should indeed continue to obey what the law of Yahweh commands in regard to the head covering while ministering in the temple. This fulfills the function of the temple/tabernacle on the earth, to serve as a "copy and shadow" of the heavenly one.
What about the "Kippah?"
Today, some are claiming to justify the Jewish tradition of wearing a kippa (a round skullcap), or covering your head with a Talit (a rectangular garment) while praying. The reasoning is that we are all "priests of our home" and should therefore wear a head covering just as the priests of Yahweh did who functioned in the tabernacle.
But if this is the real reason, why stop with the head covering? With that reasoning, you would also need to wear the linen tunic & sash, the crown on top of your head covering, the breastplate with the 12 stones, and don't forget the blood of a young bull as a sin offering and a ram as a burnt offering when you enter the holy of holies (Leviticus 16)! Of course, this argument doesn't really hold water at all because we are not High Priests who are functioning in an earthly tabernacle. Still, many insist on it even though it is not commanded anywhere.
So what do they do with the passage in 1 Corinthians? One of the main points made by those who hold to this belief is what they believe to be a mistranslation of 1 Corinthians 11:4. They believe the phrase "head covered" is a mistranslation of the Greek which has "Kata Kaphalay":
1 Corinthians 11:4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered [Kata Kaphalay], dishonors his head.
They instead translate the Greek phrase "Kata Kaphalay" as having something "down over your head." They believe that this scripture is referring to a woman's head covering, not a man's head covering. Thus, they believe that Paul was simply pointing out that any man wearing a woman's garment is dishonoring the Messiah.
But is this true? Was Paul really only talking about a woman's head covering?
To help us answer this question, let's look for other possible places where this same Greek phrase is used. One problem is that this phrase isn't used anywhere else in the "New Testament" scriptures. For this reason, what it really means might be up to interpretation.
Thankfully, the Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures dating to 200-300 BCE, uses the exact same phrase "kata kaphalay" in one place. It is used in the following scripture when referring to Haman's head covering:
Esther 6:11-12 - So Haman took the robe and the horse, arrayed Mordecai and led him on horseback through the city square, and proclaimed before him, "Thus shall it be done to the man whom the king delights to honor!" 12 Afterward Mordecai went back to the king's gate. But Haman hurried to his house, mourning and with his head covered [Kata Kaphalay].
The phrase is also correctly translated "head covered" in various English translations of this Greek phrase. The context of this scripture is speaking of the time that Haman was humiliated by having to parade through town and honor Mordecai, his enemy. Obviously, after being totally humiliated, Haman wouldn't desire to humiliate himself even further by putting on a woman's head covering. Clearly, it can safely be concluded that "kata kaphalay" simply means "head covered." There is no need to add anything else to that.
The reason given in 1 Corinthians 11 as why men should not cover their heads has nothing to do with putting on a woman's garment. Paul didn't quote from the law and warn the Corinthians against putting on women's clothing. Instead, he says:
1 Corinthians 11:7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of Elohim.
With all that we have read, comparing various scriptures on these matters, we can understand that in baptism, we died with Messiah and we are also raised with Him.
Colossians 2:12 Buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of Elohim, who raised Him from the dead.
Thus, it is Yahushua the Messiah who lives in us. The old Adam died and neither Adam nor his glory should be manifested in Yahweh's presence.
Yahushua (the second Adam) needs to be what Yahweh sees while praying and prophesying. It is His image and glory that now dwells in us. We are His body, the body of the Messiah. The men who choose to wear a head covering are causing the image and glory of Elohim to be covered. Thus, scripture says they dishonor Him and are failing to give proper recognition to Yahweh's work in them through Yahushua the Messiah. We need to be a people who not only accept the good news that Yahushua lives in us, we need to be acting like it and proclaiming this good news to all the world. When a man obeys the principles of the head covering in 1 Corinthians 11, he is recognizing Yahushua's work in him and the heavenly High Priesthood of Yahushua the Messiah, a priest after the order of Melchizedek, the priest that gave us access to the true Holy of Holies:
Hebrews 10:19 Therefore, brethren, having boldness to enter the Holiest by the blood of Yahushua, 20 by a new and living way which He consecrated for us, through the veil, that is, His flesh, 21 and having a High Priest over the house of Yahweh, 22 let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. 23 Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful.
Hebrews 4:15-16 For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin. 16 Let us therefore come boldly to the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need.
This is a "new and living way," so let's not fear something that scripture teaches on the basis that it is new, or old. Let's learn to obey all of Yahweh's inspired words in the scriptures, no matter when they were written, or who happened to be holding the pen. Let's be like the wise scribes:
Matthew 13:52 Then He said to them, "Therefore every scribe instructed concerning the kingdom of heaven is like a householder who brings out of his treasure things new and old."
Our participation in Messiah's death and resurrection is a new principle that was never directly taught in the law. 1 Corinthians 11 and other scriptures show that the head covering issue is directly connected to this. If He lives in you, don't dishonor Him in your prayers by covering the image and glory of Yahweh: Yahushua the Messiah living in you.
Instead of trusting in our own glory to approach the throne of Yahweh (which would cause our sins to be made manifest), Yahweh desires that Yahushua, the High Priest of the heavenly tabernacle, is seen in each us. We are His body. With Him, we are declared righteous. Without Him, we cannot approach the Father. He is the way, the truth and the life. No man comes to the Father, except by Him.
We are ministers of the new covenant (2Cor 3:6). The promise of the new covenant was that the law of Yahweh would be placed in our hearts and minds.
Jeremiah 31:33 "But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says Yahweh: I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their Elohim, and they shall be My people.
This is accomplished by His Spirit dwelling in us through Yahushua the Messiah, the "Word" which became flesh:
John 1:14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
It is His image and glory that dwells in us. This is the good news (gospel) that should not be rejected:
2 Corinthians 4:3-6 But even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, 4 whose minds the elohim of this age has blinded, who do not believe, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Messiah, who is the image of Elohim, should shine on them. 5 For we do not preach ourselves, but Messiah Yahushua the Master, and ourselves your bondservants for Yahushua' sake. 6 For it is the Elohim who commanded light to shine out of darkness, who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of Elohim in the face of Yahushua Messiah.
The word is a light, a lamp unto our feet. And now it is in our hearts through Yahushua.
Yahushua is the word made flesh who dwells within us.
Thus, the light has shown in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the "glory of Elohim in the face of Yahushua the Messiah."
Therefore, let's not cover that glory. Let's allow this "image and glory of Elohim" to shine in His presence, giving thanks to Yahweh our Elohim for this awesome work in Yahushua! For it is this awesome work that enables us to be declared righteous before Yahweh. Let's rejoice over the treasure that Yahweh has given, Yahushua the Messiah living in us:
2 Corinthians 4:7-10 But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellence of the power may be of Elohim and not of us. 8 We are hard pressed on every side, yet not crushed; we are perplexed, but not in despair; 9 persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed -- 10 always carrying about in the body the dying of the Master Yahushua, that the life of Yahushua also may be manifested in our body.
Yahushua is indeed a treasure in our otherwise weak earthen vessels to show forth Yahweh's AWESOME power in redeeming our souls. In our prayers, and in all that we do, let's cause the life of Yahushua be manifested in our body.
Colossians 3:1-3 If then you were raised with Messiah, seek those things which are above, where Messiah is, sitting at the right hand of Elohim. 2 Set your mind on things above, not on things on the earth. 3 For you died, and your life is hidden with Messiah in Elohim.
So rather than bringing Him dishonor, let's honor and lift up the name of Yahushua the Messiah:
Revelation 5:11-13 Then I looked, and I heard the voice of many angels around the throne, the living creatures, and the elders; and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands, 12 saying with a loud voice: "Worthy is the Lamb who was slain To receive power and riches and wisdom, And strength and honor and glory and blessing!" 13 And every creature which is in heaven and on the earth and under the earth and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, I heard saying: "Blessing and honor and glory and power Be to Him who sits on the throne, And to the Lamb, forever and ever!"
John 5:23 that all should honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.
Head Coverings for Women
The following section will require some humility on the part of those who read it, especially for women. Today, there is often a cultural stigma against head coverings for holy purposes, and a woman wearing a real head covering (and I don't mean the "bandanna" that seems to be in vogue lately) is often viewed as strange or unusual. I realize that a woman's appearance is often a very touchy subject because of the societal focus on the fleshly appearances. This kind of societal focus has brought a lot of pain and problems into the lives of women and this should not be.
Proverbs 31:30 (ISR) Loveliness is deceptive And prettiness is vain, A woman who fears Yahweh is to be praised.
I would encourage everyone reading this section to mentally remove themselves from any concern about appearance and just let the holy scriptures to speak for themselves, asking Yahweh for guidance.
It is necessary that the above section on the head coverings for men be fully understood before one can begin to understand why women must cover their head in prayer. So if you haven't read the first section of this study, please do so.
Concerning the head coverings for women, let's first look at the principles involved in 1 Corinthians. The backdrop to the entire chapter is the following verse:
1 Corinthians 11:3 But I want you to know that the head of every man is Messiah, the head of woman is man, and the head of Messiah is Elohim.
Why is this even mentioned? What does it have to do with the head covering? We will examine this at length and seek to understand why scripture says a woman should wear a head covering.
We saw in the former section of this study that man is the image and glory of Yahweh because he has the righteousness of Yahushua the Messiah upon him. But what about woman?
1 Corinthians 11:7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of Elohim; but woman is the glory of man.
This scripture says that the woman is the glory of man. What might this have to do with the head covering?
We know from Genesis that Chawah (Eve) was taken out of Adam.
Genesis 2:21-24 And Yahweh Elohim caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place. 22 Then the rib which Yahweh Elohim had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man. 23 And Adam said: "This is now bone of my bones And flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, Because she was taken out of Man." 24 Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.
In light of the fact that woman was taken out of Adam, we can see why woman would be the glory of man. The fact that woman was taken from man, and the fact that she was created for him, are the reasons given as to why she is the glory of man:
1 Corinthians 11:7-9 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of Elohim; but woman is the glory of man. 8 For man is not from woman, but woman from man. 9 Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man.
So the principle given here is that the image and glory of Elohim must not be covered, but the glory of man must be covered.
Another statement that should be addressed in this chapter is how the head covering relates to a woman's hair. :
1 Corinthians 11:3-7 I want you to know that the head of every man is Messiah, the head of woman is man, and the head of Messiah is Elohim. 4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonors his head. 5 But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved. 6 For if a woman is not covered, let her also be shorn. But if it is shameful for a woman to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered. 7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of Elohim; but woman is the glory of man
Notice first of all that if a woman were to pray with her head uncovered, it would dishonor the man. How would it dishonor a man if a woman were to pray without a head covering? Somehow honor and dishonor is connected to headship and authority. And somehow the head covering are connected to both.
In the same way a man would dishonor the Messiah by not wearing a head covering because he ignoring the fact the he is not the Messiah and he needs the Messiah's image and glory within him, the woman would dishonor her head by ignoring the fact that she is not a man and "man is not from woman, but woman from man. Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man." She is not recognizing that she is Adam's glory and instead trying to act as if she is the one who is the "glory of Elohim." This is why it says that if a woman prayed with her head uncovered, "that is one and the same as if her head were shaved." If her head were shaved, she would look more like a man.
1 Corinthians 11:13-15 Judge among yourselves. Is it proper for a woman to pray to Elohim with her head uncovered? 14 Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him? 15 But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her for a covering.
Here we see that Paul is further cementing his point that woman should cover her head while men should not by pointing out that even nature itself teaches the proper head covering principles. Typically, women will grow their hair long but men keep their hair cut short. The long hair is given to a woman "for a covering." The word translated "covering" is the Greek word "peribolaion." (#4018). This word is found in one other verse of the 'New Testament:
Hebrews 1:10-12 And: "You, Yahweh, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth, And the heavens are the work of Your hands. 11 They will perish, but You remain; And they will all grow old like a garment; 12 Like a cloak "peribolaion." (#4018) you will fold them up, And they will be changed. But You are the same, And Your years will not fail."
Since this verse in Hebrews is a quote from the book of Psalms, we can learn more about it by looking up this verse in the Psalms:
Psalm 102:26 They will perish, but You will endure; Yes, they will all grow old like a garment; Like a cloak You will change them, And they will be changed.
So we gather from these scriptures that the long hair of a woman is is given to her for a cloak or garment.
Some have suggested that a woman can cover her head by simply growing her hair long and a man can keep his head uncovered by keeping his hair cut short. The reasoning is that since long hair is likened unto a garment, a woman only need to grow her hair long and her head will be covered. But there are at least 7 reasons why this cannot be:
1. Long hair doesn't actually cover the head. It only covers the back of someone's neck and a part of their back at best. So whether one has short hair or long hair, their hair still covers the same region of their head. Long hair doesn't cover a woman's head any more than a man's short hair does.
2. If a man took a Nazirite vow (as Paul did in Acts 18:18 and four brethren did in Acts 21:23) then they would at some point not be permitted to pray because a Nazirite vow involved growing your hair long (Num 6:5). If a man prayed while having long hair as a result of taking a Nazirite vow, he would be dishonoring the Messiah because his long hair is supposedly a "covering."
3. Whether a man has short hair or long hair has nothing to do with him being the image and glory of Yahweh through Yahushua the Messiah.
4. If long hair were the head covering, consider the convoluted statement that would come out of verse 5:
1 Corinthians 11:5-6 But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered (wears short hair) dishonors her head (the man), for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved. 6 For if a woman is not covered (wears short hair), let her also be shorn.
We see here that shaven hair is not the same as short hair because (by this interpretation) it says if she wears short hair, "let her also be shorn." So they are not the same. But since they are different, why would Paul say they are 'one and the same'?
The truth is he's not comparing a woman with short hair to a woman with even shorter hair. He's comparing a woman with no head covering (trying to be a man by refusing to accept that she came from Adam) to a woman with shaved hair (again trying to look like a man).
5. Scripture says in 1Cor 11:10 that the covering is a "sign of authority because of the angels". How could a woman's hair length (her own glory) be a sign of authority? It doesn't make any sense.
6. If a woman's long hair were a proper "head covering" to cover the glory of Adam, why would the glory of Adam need to be covered in the garden of Eden before sin ever came?
7. Even if the hair were given as a head covering to cover the glory of Adam, the hair itself is "a woman's glory." It is the glory of Elohim that should be manifest during prayer and prophesying, not our own glory.
So what was Paul talking about here? Let's read it again for clarification:
1 Corinthians 11:13-15 Judge among yourselves. Is it proper for a woman to pray to Elohim with her head uncovered? 14 Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him? 15 But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her for a covering.
So nature itself teaches the need for some kind of covering for a woman, but not for a man. A man doesn't have long hair so he doesn't have a natural garment attached to their head. A woman does have long hair and so she does have a natural garment attached to her head. For the unconvinced, Paul used this illustration to demonstrate that even nature itself parallels the need for a woman to have a head covering attached to their head while men do not. He asked them the question of "Is it proper for a woman to pray to Elohim with her head uncovered?" and answered it with an illustration from nature. We can even judge for ourselves that a woman praying with an uncovered head is improper because there is no shame in a woman having long hair but it is a shame for man to have long hair.
Nevertheless, Paul quickly points out in the next verse that a man having short hair and a woman having long hair is not necessarily a custom of the assembly:
1 Corinthians 11:16 But if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor do the assemblies of Elohim.
If it were an official custom of the assembly that men must have short hair and women must have long hair, Paul himself would have violated that himself it when he took the Nazirite vow (Acts 18:18, 21:23) which required one to let their hair grow long. Paul was simply using the long hair/short hair illustration to further demonstrate that women should wear head coverings and men should not. Women naturally wear a type of garment but men naturally generally do not.
Some have suggested that the "custom" spoken of in this verse 16 refers to the head covering. In other words, the assembly doesn't actually teach that women should cover their head and men should keep their head uncovered so don't make it a matter of contention.
1 Corinthians 11:4 - Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonors his head.
This is either true, or it isn't. I believe it is true. So if it is really the head covering issue spoken of in verse 16, then Paul would basically be saying "If anyone chooses to dishonor Yahushua, don't contend with him because we have no such custom of honoring Yahushua, nor do the assemblies of Elohim." Clearly, this would be double talk. It absolutely is a custom in the body of Messiah to honor the Messiah and refrain from dishonoring him. How could it ever be otherwise?
Keeping ourselves from dishonoring Yahushua is certainly an important issue, so the head covering cannot be what verse 16 was talking about. It makes much more sense if we understand that he is speaking of long/short hair not being a custom in the assembly, for Paul himself took a Nazirite vow which would require him to grow his hair long. There were also situations where even a woman might need to shave their head, such as for the cleansing of leprosy (Lev 14:9).
Because of the Angels?
1 Corinthians 11:10 For this reason the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.
Concerning this phrase "Because of the angels", there have been many interpretations. It seems to come out of nowhere and has caused much conjecture as to its meaning. Of course, this is where the belief that a woman's hair is an adequate covering starts to really fall apart. How could a woman's long hair give her the authority to come to Yahweh in prayer?
One interpretation states that the angels would again 'see that the daughters of men were fair' and would be tempted to sin like the fallen angels of old (Gen. 6:2). One problem with this is that the angels are present at any given time, not just praying and prophesying. What if she's in the shower? Obviously this could be a problem at any time.
Another interpretation says that the angels of Yahweh would be shocked at the conduct of the women when they are uncovering their heads in prayer or prophesying. But it seems to me that there are a lot of behaviors more shocking than a woman not covering their head and there aren't any other verses in scripture saying "Don't do this because of the angels." The fact that it says women ought to have the 'sign of authority on her head BECAUSE of the angels' seems to indicate that the whole purpose of the head covering is because of them. This doesn't really line up with the reasoning given in rest of the chapter.
So what might it mean? It is important to understand that unlike the English language where "angel" always refers to a spiritual being, in both Hebrew and Greek there is a dual meaning.
The Greek word used for 'angel' (#32 angelos) here is most often translated 'angel' but it is also translated 'messenger' 7 times in the KJV. In each case it is translated 'messenger,' it is referring to a person, not an angelic being. Here is an example:
Luke 7:24 When the messengers (#32 angelos) of John had departed, He began to speak to the multitudes concerning John: "What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken by the wind?
The word 'messengers' here is the word in question. It is the Greek word most often translated "Angel" (angelos, #32). So we can see that in Greek, this word has a dual meaning. What about Hebrew?
In Hebrew, the word has the same basic dual meaning only with even greater variation. The Hebrew word "Malak" (#4397) is translated "angel" 111 times and "messenger" 98 times. Here is a great example of this:
Malachi 2:7 "For the lips of a priest should keep knowledge, And people should seek the law from his mouth; For he is the messenger of Yahweh of hosts.
So Yahweh calls the priest a "malak" because from his mouth the people would learn the instruction and teaching of Yahweh.
In the body of Messiah, men have been given this responsibility. As it is written:
1Timothy 2:12 And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve.
We often refer to a scripture study as a "message." Messages are given by messengers. So with this in mind, let's read the verse in question again. This time we will insert the alternative translation:
1 Corinthians 11:10 For this reason the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the messengers.
It makes far more sense in my view to say that a woman wears a head covering "because of the men/messengers." This is more in line with the other scriptures in this chapter such as:
1 Corinthians 11:5 But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head
It is because a woman should not dishonor her head that she is told to wear a head covering. Therefore, it makes more sense that she is wearing the head covering "because of the men (messengers)." A husband is the teacher of his wife and is commanded to "cleanse her with the washing of water by the word" in Ephesians 5:26.
The word translated "authority" in verse 10 is #1849 "exousia" and means "Power of choice, liberty of doing as one pleases" in the Thayer's Greek lexicon and "(in the sense of ability); privilege" in the Strong's Greek Lexicon. So with a head covering, a woman has the ability, liberty and privilege of coming to Yahweh in prayer. Therefore the head covering is referred to as an "exousia" on her head, which she wears "because of the messengers" (men) who will be dishonored if she chooses not to wear it.
1 Corinthians 11: Verse by verse
Up to this point in the study I have chosen to address each of the verses in an order that I believe will best help to explain the principles given in each verse. For instance, I desired to address the men's and women's head coverings separately even though Paul mentions both of them together. I felt this was needful in order to understand the reasons given in scripture as to why a man should not cover his head but a woman should.
But now that we have carefully examined each principle in detail, let's now go through each of these verses in 1 Corinthians 11, in their original order.
1 Corinthians 11:1-4 Imitate me, just as I also imitate Messiah. 2 Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you. 3 But I want you to know that the head of every man is Messiah, the head of woman is man, and the head of Messiah is Elohim. 4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonors his head.
Men do not cover their heads because man was created in the image and glory of Yahweh. Even though man was created in His image and glory, we have all fallen short of the glory of Yahweh. Therefore, we all need to receive the good news of Yahushua the Messiah, cleave to the new covenant promises, and be "crucified/impaled with Messiah" so that He might live in us:
Galatians 2:20 "I have been crucified with Messiah; it is no longer I who live, but Messiah lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of Elohim, who loved me and gave Himself for me.
We need Yahushua in us as the "brightness of the glory of Yahweh" and the "express image of His person" (Heb 1:3). If we, who receive the heavenly High Priest (Hebrews 7:21) as the One dwelling within us, choose to cover our heads in prayer, then we are in essence doubting that "Yahushua dwelling in us" is adequate as the glory needed to approach the Father.
Over and over again (particularly in Hebrews) it is written that the priesthood of Yahushua the Messiah is a spiritual one. The sacrifices are spiritual, the temple is spiritual, everything is spiritual. This why men also only need the spiritual covering of Yahushua the Messiah upon their head when we spiritually come into the presence of Yahweh. We already have the veil needed to appear righteous unto Yahweh while in His presence:
When Yahweh sees us...He must see Yahushua and His righteousness in us. We dishonor our head (Yahushua) by not recognizing that it is He who dwells in us through the promises in the new covenant, a covenant we receive by faith.
There is nothing about this that changes any of the laws given in the old covenant. The laws of the old covenant are silent about whether or not one should be baptized in Yahushua's name, and whether the common people needed to wear a head covering or not. Both baptism and the head covering issue are interconnected because baptism represents the death of the old man (Adam) and the new man (Yahushua) dwelling in us. Therefore we ought not cover the glory of the new man and we ought to cover the glory of the old man (woman).
1 Corinthians 11:5-9 But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved. 6 For if a woman is not covered, let her also be shorn. But if it is shameful for a woman to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered. 7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of Elohim; but woman is the glory of man. 8 For man is not from woman, but woman from man. 9 Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man.
Because woman was created for man (Adam) she ought to cover the glory of Adam. Our glory is a lesser glory...and an unworthy glory. The only glory that should be uncovered is Yahushua the Messiah, the glory of Yahweh!
If a woman were to uncover her head, then it would dishonor her head (the man) because she is trying to bypass him and act as a male. Man was not created for the woman but the woman was created for the man. This concept is what is behind the principles of authority in this chapter and in the other scriptures as well.
10 For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.
Since we must come to Yahweh in reverence for authority, it is the head covering that gives the woman the ability/privilege/authority to come to Yahweh. Without the glory of man (Adam) man being covered, she should not come to Yahweh because she is not respecting Yahweh's order.
11 Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in Yahweh' 12 For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of Yahweh.
This acknowledges that although woman is from the man, man cannot now exist without the woman for she gives birth to the man in childbearing....however all things are of Yahweh.
13 Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto Yahweh uncovered? 14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? 15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering. 16 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the assemblies of Yahweh.
For the unconvinced, Paul used this illustration to demonstrate that even nature itself parallels the need for a woman to have a head covering attached to their head while men do not. He asked them the question of "Is it proper for a woman to pray to Elohim with her head uncovered?" and answered it with an illustration from nature. We can even judge for ourselves that a woman praying with an uncovered head is improper because there is no shame in a woman having long hair but it is a shame for man to have long hair. Since the long hair functions as a type of garment for covering, the natural thing would be for a woman to be covered and a man uncovered. Nevertheless, there are exceptions to this so it is not an official custom of the assembly.
But it is always a custom and principle in the assembly that we ought to honor Yahushua. Respect and honor for authority is very important in the eyes of Yahweh. He included the principle of honoring our Father and Mother in the Ten Commandments.
We must inherently honor the one who took part in bringing us life. Were it not for our parents, we would have no life, therefore we must honor them.
Woman was taken from man, therefore woman must honor the man.
Were it not for Yahushua, none of us would have eternal life abiding in us, therefore we must all honor Him.
And it is the Heavenly Father who is the giver of all life, therefore all (including Messiah) must honor Him.
So as a token of honor, let's heed the principles of the head covering given in this chapter of scripture. When we examine the reasoning given for the head covering in 1 Corinthians, and compare it to the rest of the holy scriptures, it all lines up and makes perfect sense. Let's set aside societal pressures and efforts to justify Jewish traditions, and let's pick up the scriptures and learn to accept whatever it has to teach us, no matter where it says it.
Some questions answered:
A common question I have received is whether or not an unmarried person is supposed to wear a head covering. From what I see in scripture, it is more so a man-woman issue (though it is ultimately fulfilled in the husband and wife). In fact, Paul never specifically says "husband and wife" in 1 Corinthians 11. In a general sense women are under the authority of men. For this reason, I believe that all women -- including divorced, widowed and even young girls -- who are essentially women in training -- ought to wear the head covering.
Another question I often receive is whether a woman should wear a head covering at all times. According to scripture, it is only needed when praying or prophesying. However, there is a scriptural principle of "praying without ceasing" (1Thess. 5:17). In other words, keep the lines of communication with Yahweh always open. Having to locate and put on a head covering every time can be a hindrance to that. As believers, we will often say short little prayers during the day as various circumstances arise. A spiritually minded woman could hardly go an hour without praying. Also, we do want to follow the principle of "praying in secret" that Yahushua shared (Mat 6:6). If a woman wore a head covering always, she could pray often in secret and only her and Yahweh would know. Then our Father, who sees in secret, will reward her openly. May it be so!
Through all of this, let's not lose sight of the real purpose in prayer, and that is to communicate with the Heavenly Father. We want to always approach Him in reverence, and with respect. His hand is not too short to accomplish anything that we ask in faith, and He loves it when we speak to Him, and about Him in truth.
--------------------
Strive to enter in at the strait gate:for many, I say unto you will seek to enter in, and shall not be able. ( Luke 13:24 )
Posts: 4578 | From: Southeast Texas | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
bluefrog
unregistered
|
posted
WildB..You and I needs to get busy and find out about converted hearts.
IP: Logged |
|
|
bluefrog
unregistered
|
posted
becauseHElives...
You claim that my comments about head coverings is taken lightly and made fun of.
Well now, it saddens me that you feel like that.
You claim that I nor anyone else can show you one verse in scripture where the glory is not to be covered.
I just did. That sounds like a question to me. If not, call it what you may and I will retract my calling it a question.
Are you telling me that all the women in churches who do not cover their heads are not covering their glory?
IP: Logged |
|
|
becauseHElives
Advanced Member
Member # 87
|
posted
bluefrog I ask no question, I made a clear statement!
quote:
the basis for head covering is the scriptures and the scriptures alone
do a study on covering the glory in scripture, you will find the glory is always covered!
bluefrog and WildB I understand to many anything that hints of obedience is some kind of works, it is sad so many understand so little about the converted heart....
--------------------
Strive to enter in at the strait gate:for many, I say unto you will seek to enter in, and shall not be able. ( Luke 13:24 )
Posts: 4578 | From: Southeast Texas | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
bluefrog
unregistered
|
posted
Yahsway...wait a minute...How did we get from God Bless the Women to Circumcision and Baptism ?
Never Mind. lol
I'll skip the circumcision but to me Baptism is simply a demonstration to Fellow Members of the Faith through Action. A time to celebrate the new life of a fellow human being.
If circumstances happen to be that doesn't allow the baptism it doesn't mean the person will not be saved.
IP: Logged |
|
|
bluefrog
unregistered
|
posted
becauseHElives...you asked for a scripture why women wear a head covering. I gave it to you but that involved the initial reasoning.
Before you get a craving for frog legs may I press on to EDEN's response, but it doesn't explain why they do it now.
Eden directed us to 1 Cor 11:10, and that's good.
However, look at the situation. As you know Paul was known for having burrs under his blanket. This time there were two things. One was the head coverings and the other was stuffing their faces in church for the Lord's Supper. The eating issue I will leave on the table for now.
The custom in the area was for women to cover their heads, and for several reasons. One or two of the reasons were spiritualy founded so they thought, but Paul was kind, he didn't want to make a big deal out of it and get them all stirred up, he just wanted them to know that and pointed out that the Lord was the master. So, in verse 13 Paul starts telling them to just judge (krino: determine or conclude)for yourselves, ie, it's a local thang so have it your way. But you see, that has nothing to do with covering the head here and now.
IP: Logged |
|
|
yahsway
Advanced Member
Member # 3738
|
posted
well, okay, exactly! It was "symbollic" They passed thru the "Red Sea"
It is a covenantal view Not a means by which salvation is brought about, but as a sign and seal of the covenant.
On the one hand baptisim is a sign of the covenant. on the other, it is the means by which people enter into that covenant.
In the covenantal view, baptism serves the same purpose for New Test. believers that circumcision did for old test believers.
For the Jews, circumcision was the external and visable sign that they were within the covenant that God had established with Abraham.
Converts to Judaism also had to undergo this rite.
But now under the New Covenant, baptism instead of circumcision is required.
Circumcision referrs to a cutting away of sin and a change of heart (Duet 10:16 Ez 44:7 Similarly, baptism also depicts a washing away of sin (Acts 2:38 Titus 3:5) and a spiritual renewal (Rom 6:4 Col 2:11-12)
In fact, these 2 procedures are clearly linked in Col 2:11-12-
"In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, buried with Him in baptisim, in which you also were raised with Him thru faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead."
There is also a symbolic view, a sign, an outward indication of the inner change that has already occurred in the believers life.
This position explains that the church practices baptisim and the believer submits to it because Jesus commanded that this be done and He gave us the example by being baptized Himself.
Nevertheless, in regards to head coverings for women, Eden simply meant "In this way" or better said Just as we are commanded to follow Christ commands, we also follow His order and design for man and woman which is from the beginning.
That is that Adam and Eve were created mutually interdependent (1cor 11:11) Togethere they make up humanity in its completed form. The order and design in their creation reveals the glory of God (v. 7) and headship of Christ (v.3)
Eve acted "independently" of Adam in the Garden, so God set down the rules. And in 1 Cor chapter 11 it is very clear.
So when a married lady wears her headcovering in an assembly she honors her husband in the public setting, since as scripture says "he is the image and glory of God" (v7).
Its like saying, this is my husband, my provider, my final decsion maker ect...and i do not act on anything independantly from him.
I know that for a lot of people this seems "Old fashioned" out dated, ect... But i see beauty in Gods created order.
Posts: 1238 | From: Tennessee | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
WildB
Moderator
Member # 2917
|
posted
Was Mose's and his baptized?
if so how?
No water touched them.
--------------------
That is all.....
Posts: 8775 | From: USA, MICHIGAN | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
yahsway
Advanced Member
Member # 3738
|
posted
I understand about Yeshuas Baptisim, I am talking about Yeshuas comission to His disciples before His return to the Father to go out into all the Nations, teaching them whatsoever He commanded and to Baptize them in the name of the Father Son and Holy Spirit.
Now this He gave to them as a command, that they go and Baptize, not to say that He, by the working power of His Holy Spirit would not Baptise them with the Fire, but that they were to go and to immerse those who accepted Him.
Just like Phillip did with the Eunich.
Posts: 1238 | From: Tennessee | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
WildB
Moderator
Member # 2917
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by yahsway:
WildB, were you baptized by water in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, after you believed on Yeshua? If you were, why did you get baptized?
This may help to answer your question.
I was more like the thief on the cross.
This may help you to understand what baptizium really is. What it really means.
--------------------
That is all.....
Posts: 8775 | From: USA, MICHIGAN | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
yahsway
Advanced Member
Member # 3738
|
posted
WildB, were you baptized by water in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, after you believed on Yeshua? If you were, why did you get baptized?
This may help to answer your question.
Posts: 1238 | From: Tennessee | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
WildB
Moderator
Member # 2917
|
posted
quote:
Originally posted by becauseHElives:
bluefrog I oppose the Roman Catholic Church with all that is in me, it is worse than a cult, it is demonic...
the basis for head covering is the scriptures and the scriptures alone
do a study on covering the glory in scripture, you will find the glory is always covered!
Amen Eden, good observation of the depth of scripture....the mention of angels watching in relation to the head covering issue, proves it is not a cultural issue....
angels are "ministering spirits sent forth to
minister for those who will inherit salvation" - He 1:13-14
And this has to do with water baptismal in what way?
--------------------
That is all.....
Posts: 8775 | From: USA, MICHIGAN | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
yahsway
Advanced Member
Member # 3738
|
posted
Good post Eden, I too agree, Behind the symbolism of women wearing the veil is the acknowledgment of mankinds need to show submission to Yahweh Gods divinely appointed authority.
Posts: 1238 | From: Tennessee | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
|
|
WildB
Moderator
Member # 2917
|
posted
Like water baptism, head covering is a signal to God and to the angels by which the believer signals that "she submits to God's hierarchy", unlike Lucifer.
Wow! please post your scripture?
--------------------
That is all.....
Posts: 8775 | From: USA, MICHIGAN | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Eden
unregistered
|
posted
All kidding aside, bluefrog, I do think there is a spiritual significance to women wearing a covering over their hair when they enter the church building, and it is this.
God has established the following hierarchy on earth: God, Jesus, man (husband), woman (wife), and child.
When a woman willingly puts on a covering when she enters the church, she signals to the good angels, but also to the evil angels which side she is on, namely, God's.
She does not blatantly "usurp" spiritual power from her husband by walking with her hair uncovered into the church, which, when the wicked spirits see it, they know what it means.
So look what the Bible says:
1 Corinthians 11:10
For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head, because of the angels.
It is like water baptism. By water baptism we signal to the powers that be, namely to God and to the angels, that we understand that God has "crucified us" and "that we are dead" and we "present ourselves to God for our burial", and that, when we come back up out of the water, we understand that we are now "alive unto God".
Like water baptism, head covering is a signal to God and to the angels by which the believer signals that "she submits to God's hierarchy", unlike Lucifer.
So it IS also a very important "spiritual matter".
love, Edenstein the Ephraimite
IP: Logged |
|
|
Michael Harrison
Advanced Member
Member # 6801
|
posted
That was a good piece of work becausehelives. He stole my thunder before I could say it, because he did so by mentioning that “Nevertheless, neither is the woman without the man, nor the man without the woman in the Lord” (1 Corinthians 11:11). And to that I will add that there is neither marriage or giving in marriage in the Kingdom of Heaven. That doubly reinforces his point that each are ‘equal’ in the Kingdom of Heaven. And the Kingdom cometh not by observation, but is within you. The Kingdom is here.
Now the single biggest problem of man is his willingness to dominate. He callously takes some things for granted, in more cases than not, I'm afraid. In fact, it is evil blindness, and comes directly out of self-righteousness. And many relationships have been marred by man’s exercising domination over a fragile, somewhat defenseless vessel who finds herself unable to simply be seen as a person, rather than an object, or piece of property whose every move is scrutinized and dictated to. And it is horrible. For many a woman has been suffocated to living death by a domineering man. And Christ would not have it so! That is perhaps why scripture says to, “Husbands ‘love’ your wives.” But men find that incomprehendable, and hard to swallow. So they just do their own thing. It is in fact not unlike child abuse.
quote:
As to the woman’s role in the fall, she believed Satan’s lie that she might become as God, and hence, was “beguiled” (Genesis 3:13; 2 Corinthians 11:3) or “deceived” (1 Timothy 2:14); whereas Adam, laboring under no such deception (1 Timothy 2:14), merely sinned due to his weakness for the woman (Genesis 3:12). Accordingly, woman’s subjection was increased after her fall (Genesis 3:16).
To the above quote I might add that though the woman was beguiled, Adam, though he was also beguiled, blamed the woman for his decision. He shamelessly did not take responsibility for his actions.
But back to the story. A woman who recognizes her husband in a submissive way, complements him. She therefore is of great worth. But if the husband is trash, and the woman still recognizes him, she is still of great worth, but there is no joy for either. It takes two.
quote:
It is, however, the burden of this presentation to show there is no scriptural authority for women elders, women preachers, or women worship leaders.
Concerning this quote above, I beg to differ. Faith is the license valued over everything else.
Jas 2:18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
And if God cannot find a man in whom to work, He will use a woman. There is a passage in the OT that says HE goes to and fro throughout the earth looking for an honest man who will serve Him. I don’t remember the wording well enough to look it up. I will use this one temporarily:
- 2Ch 16:9 For the eyes of the LORD run to and fro throughout the whole earth, to shew himself strong in the behalf of them whose heart is perfect toward him. Herein thou hast done foolishly: therefore from henceforth thou shalt have wars.
quote:
Secondly, the New Testament does not authorize a female (public preaching) ministry; but rather positively prohibits such.
Paul limits the extent of a woman’s forth-speaking (teaching, etc.) when he writes: “I permit not a woman to teach, nor to have dominion over a man, but to be in quietness” (1 Timothy 2:12). The negative conjunction ,oude (nor), here is explanatory in force, revealing that the kind of teaching prohibited by the apostle is that which assumes dominion over the man (Lenski, 563).
These passages, in my opinion are not a literal license for a man to do just what I have said in the opening of this post, which is to ‘dominate’ and frustrate woman-kind.
In other words, if a woman is not supposed to ‘preach’ let her find out from the Lord. It is upon her to be submissive to the will of God, not the man to believe he is an instrument of chastisement. That is in my opinion, a worse sin.
Posts: 3273 | From: Charlotte N.C. | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
|
|
bluefrog
unregistered
|
posted
becauseHElives....when are you going to publish that book you just wrote ?
I'm sorry that you see it that way and am sorry that you didn't pick up on what I was saying. I do try to splain myself gooder.
First of all, I stick to what I said. You may or may not know it but the Catholic church requires women to cover their head when entering church. Where they get this is from Eze 12: 18-21 which also refers to the rapture theory, ie flying away. Only the Catholics practice this.
Secondly, you said that I gave Michael a link on the subject. Nope...wasn't me.
As for all your references to writings of men, I just use the bible. I have read a lot of good books on biblical studies but hardly ever quoate them.
If you are Catholic you may not know that women do not cover their heads in church in Protestant churches. Sorry if I upset you.
IP: Logged |
|
|
becauseHElives
Advanced Member
Member # 87
|
posted
bluefrog you need to understand a thing before you comment on things... head covering you so lightly make fun of is a very important issue for the church.... you nor anyone else can show me one verse in scripture where the glory (is not to be covered) ...
women do have a very important role in the church and many women were martyred for their faith but the link you provided Michael ...
http://www.godswordtowomen.org/richardriss.htm
... is incorrect in it's teachings
please read the following.....
Woman’s Role in the Church
By WAYNE JACKSON
And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul (Genesis 2:7).
And Jehovah God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a help meet for him (Genesis 2:18).
And Jehovah God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof: and the rib, which Jehovah God had taken from the man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. And the man said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man (Genesis 2:21-23).
The ancient Jewish Rabbis were fond of saying:
God had not formed woman out of the head, lest she should become proud; nor out of the eye, lest she should lust; nor out of the ear, lest she should be curious; nor out of the heart, lest she should be jealous; nor out of the hand, lest she should be covetous; nor out of the foot, lest she be a busybody; but out of the rib, which was always covered (Edersheim 1957, 146).
This indicated the modesty that was to characterize her.
The divine portrait of woman, as painted on the Biblical canvas, is remarkable indeed. The Genesis narrative distinctly lends itself to the impression that Eve, as the culmination of the creative week, was a climactic jewel in Jehovah’s handiwork.
As one wanders down the corridors of Old Testament history he is ever refreshed by encounters with such as Sarah, Rebekah, Leah, Rachel, Miriam, Deborah, Abigail, Ruth, Esther, and other noble women. Thus could the apostle Peter direct attention to those “holy women” who aforetime “hoped in God” (1 Peter 3:5).
Nor are the feminine names that adorn the New Testament record less illustrious. The names of those women who ministered to the Master, and later those who served with distinction in the church, have become proverbial.
The Plight of Ancient Woman
In order to appreciate the role of New Testament womanhood, one must, by way of contrast, consider the plight of ancient woman as she stood in the world in general.
In the antique Greek world, women were considered inferior to men. Aristotle viewed women as somewhere between slaves and freemen. Wives led lives of seclusion and practical slavery.
In Rome women enjoyed greater practical freedom, though not legal, than in Greece, but licentiousness was rampant. Chastity and modesty among women were virtually unknown (note Paul’s reference to female homosexuality in Romans 1:26). Wives were truly second-class persons; more honor was shown to a man’s mistress than to his wife.
Though the Jewish opinion of womanhood during the time of Christ needed considerable improvement—a male’s morning prayer expressed thanks to God that the petitioner was neither a Gentile, a slave, or a woman—such attitudes were the result of heathen influences.
While women were somewhat legally inferior under the law of Moses, practically speaking, wives and mothers in Israel enjoyed the greatest of dignity. Mothers were to be honored (Exodus 20:12) and to rebel against, or show disrespect for, one’s mother was a most serious offense which could be punished by death (Deuteronomy 21:18ff; 27:16).
Though the Hebrew woman was under the authority of her father and later of her husband, she enjoyed considerable freedom and was not shut up in the harem . . . . Though women did not ordinarily inherit property, in a case of a sonless home the daughters might inherit (Num. 27). It was a man’s world, but Hebrew law protected woman’s person. Rape was punishable. Harlotry was forbidden (Lewis 1966, 425).
Edersheim pointed out that the Hebrew husband
was bound to love and cherish his wife, to support her in comfort, to redeem her if she had been sold into slavery, and to bury her, on which occasion even the poorest was to provide at least two mourning fifes and one mourning woman. He was to treat his wife with courtesy, for her tears called down Divine vengeance (n.d., 270)
If it be objected that the Old Testament practice of polygamy, along with its ease of divorce for men, placed women in an unfavorable status, it may be replied that such matters were tolerated in that “moonlight” dispensation due to the “hardness” of Israel’s hearts (Matthew 19:8), and were to be abolished with the introduction of the “better” system.
Womanhood in the New Testament
The very first chapter of the New Testament portends the status to be accorded women under the law of Christ; there, four women are alluded to in the legal ancestral catalog of the Lord. Though the practice of mentioning women in such lists was not wholly unknown, it is, in the words of A. B. Bruce, “unusual from a genealogical point of view” (1956, 62).
Paul affirmed that “God sent forth his Son, born of a woman” (Galatians 4:4). The birth of Jesus to the virgin Mary was the turning point in human history for women.
The Savior openly defied the attitudes of his day in his frequent dealings with women. He conversed with the woman at Jacob’s well (a Samaritan at that!)—a thing that shocked even the disciples (John 4:27). He refused to bend to Pharisaical pressures that he shun the sinful woman who anointed and kissed his holy feet (Luke 7:36ff). Godly women were numbered among those who ministered to the Christ (Luke 8:3), some of them accompanying him even to the foot of the cross (John 19:25).
Though the roles of specific New Testament women will be discussed later in this presentation, it is important at this point that some general considerations be noted:
Men and Women Are Both Subject to Christ’s Marriage Law
Under the law of Christ, both male and female are equally obligated to the marriage ordinance; neither husband nor wife should depart from the other (1 Corinthians 7:11). But should a husband (as in the case of an unbeliever) leave his wife, she is not bound (as a slave) (Arndt and Gingrich 1957, 205) to follow the deserter (1 Corinthians 7:15). And in the case of marital infidelity, the woman is granted the equal privilege of divorce and remarriage (cf. Matthew 19:9; Mark 10:11, 12).
Men and Women Are Dependent upon Each Other
Inspiration clearly stresses the mutual dependence of men and women in Christ. Paul says, “Nevertheless, neither is the woman without the man, nor the man without the woman in the Lord” (1 Corinthians 11:11). Neither is complete without the other.
Men and Women Equal in Salvation
In the matter of salvation, both stand on equal footing before God. Paul says concerning those who have obeyed the gospel: “[T]here can be no male and female; for ye all are one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28). Though, as Professor Colin Brown observes:
This, however, is not a call to abolish all earthly relationships. Rather, it puts these relationships in the perspective of salvation history. As Paul goes on to say, “And if you are Christ’s then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise” (Gal. 3:29; cf. also Rom. 10:2). All who are in Christ have the same status before God; but they do not necessarily have the same function (1976, 570).
Galatians 3:28 is certainly in harmony with 1 Peter 3:7 which makes it clear that women are “joint-heirs of the grace of life.”
Women Rule the Household
The New Testament authorizes woman a domain of authority within the home. Younger widows are advised to marry, bear children, and “rule the household” (1 Timothy 5:14).
Lenski says:
“To rule the house” means as the wife and mother in the home, to manage the household affairs. This is the domain and province of woman, in which no man can compete with her. Its greatness and its importance should ever be held up as woman’s divinely intended sphere, in which all her womanly qualities and gifts find full play and happiest gratification (1961, 676).
This does not indicate, of course, that woman’s authority in the home equals the man’s. He is the head of the wife and she is to be willingly in subjection to him (Ephesians 5:22, 23). Yet, he should lovingly allow her the freedom to exercise authority in the management of domestic matters, for God has ordained it.
A historian has noted:
The way in which the Church began to lift woman up into privilege and hope was one of its most prompt and beautiful transformations from the blight of paganism. Too long in the darkness, she was now helped into the sunlight (Hurst 1897, 146).
Such a transformation impressed even the heathen world; Libanius, a pagan writer, exclaimed: “What women these Christians have!”
The Divine Subordination of Woman
By divine design, man is to be the “head” of woman—in society, in the church, and in the home (1 Corinthians 11:3; Ephesians 5:22-24). This graduation of authority rests on two bases: first, the original constitution of the sexes as created, and, second, woman’s role in the fall.
Concerning the former, the Bible teaches:
1. Woman was made as a help for man—not the reverse (Genesis 2:18, 20).
2. Paul wrote: “For the man is not of the woman, but the woman of the man: for neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man” (1 Corinthians 11:8, 9).
3. And again, “For Adam was first formed, then Eve” (1 Timothy 2:13).
As to the woman’s role in the fall, she believed Satan’s lie that she might become as God, and hence, was “beguiled” (Genesis 3:13; 2 Corinthians 11:3) or “deceived” (1 Timothy 2:14); whereas Adam, laboring under no such deception (1 Timothy 2:14), merely sinned due to his weakness for the woman (Genesis 3:12). Accordingly, woman’s subjection was increased after her fall (Genesis 3:16).
These facts do not suggest that woman is inferior to man, but they do mean (to those who respect the testimony of Scripture) that she is subordinate in rank to man. It ought to be emphasized that as Christ’s subjection to the Father involved no deprivation of dignity (Philippians 2:5-11), so there is none in woman’s subjection to man. So, as we shall presently observe, because of these historical facts, the sphere of woman’s activity has been divinely circumscribed.
Women’s “Lib” or the Word of God?
As the saying goes, “From Adam’s rib to Women’s Lib, you’ve come a long way, baby.” Indeed! Some have gone a considerable distance from the word of God!
Every significant movement within society will eventually, to some degree, make itself felt in the church. The phenomenon of “women’s liberation” is no exception. There are those in the church who are clamoring that women must throw off the yoke of male domination and claim their rightful place in the body of Christ. Some are suggesting that women can be elders, preachers, and leaders in public worship.
There have been two basic approaches to this problem: Some have adopted a completely infidelic stance by asserting that certain “troubling passages” in the New Testament are merely the result of Pharisaic and Rabbinic prejudices reflecting the backward ignorances of the first century, and so, such are not authoritative for today’s church. Others, attempting to assume a more conservative position, claim there is Biblical support for feminine equality in leadership roles.
It is, however, the burden of this presentation to show there is no scriptural authority for women elders, women preachers, or women worship leaders.
First, it should hardly be necessary to labor over the point that no woman is authorized to serve as an elder, the Bible being so obvious on the matter. The elder is to be the “husband [Greek, aner—a male as opposed to a woman; Arndt and Gingrich, 65) of one wife” (Titus 1:6; 1 Timothy 3:2). The “elder women” (presbuteras) of 1 Timothy 5:2 (cf. Titus 2:3) are simply older women in contrast to the younger (neoterous), and not church leaders.
Secondly, the New Testament does not authorize a female (public preaching) ministry; but rather positively prohibits such. Perhaps the most effective way to approach this matter is to examine some of the currently circulated arguments in support of women preachers:
New Testament women prophesied (Acts 2:18; 21:9; 1 Corinthians 11:5).
It is assumed that prophesying was preaching, hence, women of the first century preached. The word “prophesy” is from two Greek roots, pro (forth) and phemi (to speak). It is a very general term and may mean “to teach, refute, reprove, admonish, comfort” (Thayer 1958, 553; cf. 1 Corinthians 14:3). It can simply suggest the idea of “giving thanks and praising God” (1 Chronicles 25:3). The meaning of the word in a given situation must be determined by the context as well as other information in the Scriptures.
Paul limits the extent of a woman’s forth-speaking (teaching, etc.) when he writes: “I permit not a woman to teach, nor to have dominion over a man, but to be in quietness” (1 Timothy 2:12). The negative conjunction ,oude (nor), here is explanatory in force, revealing that the kind of teaching prohibited by the apostle is that which assumes dominion over the man (Lenski, 563).
Certainly women may teach (cf. Titus 2:3); they may, in certain ways, even teach men. There is a reciprocal teaching in singing (Colossians 3:16), and privately, in conjunction with her husband, Priscilla was involved in teaching Apollos (Acts 18:26). But a woman may not assume the position of teacher, with the man subordinated to the role of student, without violating a New Testament command.
Was Phoebe a “Deaconess”?
On the basis of Romans 16:1-2, some have contended that:
1. Phoebe was a church official (deacon);
2. the church was to “assist her,” implying her authority over the church;
3. she had been a “helper” (prostatis) of many, implying “authority, discipline, over-seeing.”
All of this is alleged to show that Phoebe was a preacher-leader in the early church.
However:
1. The word diakonos simply means a “servant” (Matthew 23:11; John 2:5, etc.), and any official attachment to the term must be demanded by the context, as in Philippians 1:1 and 1 Timothy 3:8.
2. The fact that the saints were encouraged to “assist” Phoebe did not imply her authority over them. The Greek word paristerni meant to “come to the aid of, help, stand by” (Arndt and Gingrich, 633). When Paul said, “[T]he Lord stood by [pareste] me” (2 Timothy 4:17), he certainly was not asserting that he exercised authority over Christ!
3. The word prostatis (helper) does not necessitate oversight. If so, then Phoebe exercised authority over Paul, for she had been his helper as well as others! Though it is found only here in the New Testament, the term, which can connote simply rendering assistance, is used in a third-century B.C. letter from a son to his father (the verbal form): “[T]here will be nothing of more importance for me than to look after you for the remainder of life, in a manner worthy of you, and worthy of me” (Moulton and Milligan 1963, 551).
Euodia and Syntyche
In Philippians 4:2-3, Paul comments that Euodia and Syntyche “labored” with him in the gospel; he calls them, along with others, his “fellow-workers.” Again, the assumption is made that this necessitates an authoritarian position comparable to the apostle’s. However, Christians are said to be “God’s fellow-workers” (1 Corinthians 3:9); obviously, this does not suggest that we are authorized to act as deity! Countless Christian ladies have assisted gospel preachers in numerous ways without ever having become public preachers themselves.
Junia an Apostle?
It is said that Junia (KJV), a woman, was an apostle and thus certainly occupied a place of authority in the primitive church (Romans 16:7).
In the first place, in the Greek text the name is Junian (in the accusative case—the gender of the name not being evident); it could either be Junia (feminine), or more likely, Junias (masculine). Origen, a writer of the third century A.D., considered it a reference to a man (Lightfoot 1957, 96).
But secondly, it is not even certain that Junias is here identified as an “apostle.” The phrase, “of note among the apostles” (ASV), is rendered by Zahn as “famed, mentioned with honor in the circle of the apostles,” (418) giving the sense of being well—known by the apostles, rather than actually being an apostle.
In the third place, the word “apostle” is used occasionally in the Bible in a nontechnical sense to denote a messenger. Jesus says that “one sent” (apostolos) is not greater than the sender (John 13:16). The word need not imply one who has dominion over another, nor even a preacher.
What About Women Prophets in the Old Testament?
Some argue that Paul’s admonition that women be in subjection is limited by the expression, “as also saith the law” (1 Corinthians 14:34), and since the law allowed women prophets (as in the case of Miriam, Huldah, and Anna), and even a woman judge (Deborah), so preaching executives are permissible in the church today.
However:
1. When Miriam prophesied it was “all the women” that went out after (Exodus 15:20), and there is no evidence that she preached to men.
2. Though Huldah was a prophetess, the solitary record of her prophesying involved some men going to her where they communed privately (2 Kings 22:14ff; 2 Chronicles 34:22ff). It is impossible to find public preaching here.
3. Anna was a prophetess “who departed not from the temple” (Luke 2:36-38). In describing the temple, Josephus (Wars of the Jews 5.5.2) says “there was a partition built for the women” that separated them from the men; this was “the proper place wherein they were to worship.” It cannot be proved that she publicly preached to mixed audiences.
4. Deborah was a prophetess of the hill country of Ephraim, but there is no indication that she publicly proclaimed God’s message to the multitudes; rather, “the children of Israel came unto her for judgment” (Judges 4:5). She gave prophetic judgment as a “mother in Israel” (5:7). The fact that she judged at all is a dramatic commentary on the sickening weakness of the Israelites during this period, and Deborah’s song (chapter five) laments this woeful condition. This was but one of those occasions where Jehovah accommodated his working to Israel’s weaknesses (cf. 1 Samuel 8:9; Matthew 19:8).
Is 1 Corinthians 14:33 Applicable Today?
Perhaps a further comment regarding 1 Corinthians 14:33 is in order. May this context be used to oppose women preachers?
One view contends that it may not. It is alleged that contextual considerations indicate that the meeting contemplated in 1 Corinthians 14 is not comparable to any convened in the church today, and so, these verses are not applicable to church assemblies of today (Woods 1976, 106-112).
A more reasonable view that also recognizes that 1 Corinthians 14 has to do primarily with a unique first-century situation, i.e., the reception of spiritual gifts, sees Paul here enunciating essentially the same principle as set forth in 1 Timothy 2:12ff.
H. P. Hamann writes:
If we have the same writer in both letters writing on the same matter, we have the right to allow one text to explain the other, and especially to let the clearer or more definite throw light on the less precise. So 1 Tim. 2 is the key for the understanding of 1 Cor. 14 (1976, 8).
Professor Hamann then parallels the two as in the chart below (click on the chart to enlarge).
It is certain that 1 Corinthians 14:33ff lends no support to the notion of women preachers. Such are not sanctioned anywhere in the Scriptures.
Men Are Designated Leaders for Worship Assemblies
Finally, the New Testament makes it clear that the men are to lead the acts of worship in assemblies of mixed sexes.
In 1 Timothy 2:8, Paul instructs that “the men [andras—accusative plural of aner, males only] pray in every place.” Now, woman may certainly pray (1 Corinthians 11:5)—and it would hardly be denied that she could pray in every place; however, there is a sense in which only males may pray in every place. Obviously, it is the leading of prayers in mixed groups that is confined to the man.
Commenting upon this verse, a noted Greek scholar has well said, “The ministers of public prayer must be the men of the congregation, not the women” (White 1956, 106). The same principle, of course, would also apply to other acts of public worship.
It has become fashionable to assert that Paul’s teaching regarding feminine subordination was aimed at conformity to the culture of his day—somewhat as instructions concerning slavery; and, it is claimed, as the New Testament contained seeds for the abolition of slavery, so, it also contained the seed for woman’s eventual full equality with man in church life.
The alleged parallel is simply not valid. In the four major contexts where Paul discusses male-female relationships (1 Corinthians 11:2-16; 14:33b-35; Ephesians 5:22-23; 1 Timothy 2:8-15), the principle of subjection, as well as its application to specific situations, are grounded upon historical facts of Old Testament history, and not upon culture.
(Note: Some contend that the principle in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 is binding today, but not Paul’s specific application [Roberts 1959, 183ff], while others believe that both the subjection principle and its specific application are required today [Jackson 1971].]
While it is important to study ancient culture so as to better understand the Bible, it must not be an overriding factor in interpretation. To substitute culture for a stated apostolic reason is to turn exegesis into eisegesis (Sproul 1976, 13ff).
Concluding Remarks
It is regrettable that such major attention must be given to the negative side of this issue, but such appears to be necessary in view of prevalent error currently being propagated. The New Testament abounds with examples of godly women who, consistent with their assigned roles, served their Master with dignity and honor. Yes, women whose names will still be mentioned with admiration long after the modern-day feminists are gone and forgotten!
God’s women make a vital contribution to the kingdom of Christ on earth. Whether they are continuing steadfastly in prayer (Acts 1:14), doing good works and almsdeeds (Acts 9:36), showing hospitality (Acts 12:12; 16:14; 1 Timothy 5:10), teaching the word in harmony with divine authority (Acts 18:26; Titus 2:3, 4), being good wives (Proverbs 31:10ff), rearing godly children (2 Timothy 1:5; 3:14, 15), or accomplishing various other commendable tasks, let us “rise up and call them blessed.” And may their name be Legion!
Sources/Footnotes
Arndt, William and F. W. Gingrich. 1967. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Brown, Colin, ed. 1976. The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology. Vol. 11. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.
Bruce, A. B. The Expositor’s Greek Testament. Vol. 1. W. Robertson Nicholl, ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Eardmans.
Edersheim, Alfred. Marriage Among The Ancient Hebrews. The Bible Educator. Vol. 4. E. H. Plumptre, ed. London, England: Cassell Petter & Galpin.
Edersheim, Alfred. 1957. Sketches of Jewish Social Life in the Days of Christ. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.
Hamann, H. P. 1976. The New Testament and the Ordination of Women. The Christian News, March 1.
Hurst, John F. History of the Christian Church. Vol. 1. New York, NY: Eaton & Mains.
Jackson, Wayne. 1971. A Sign of Authority. Stockton, CA.
Lenski, R. C. H. 1961. The Interpretation of St. Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians, to the Thessalonians, to Timothy, to Titus, and to Philemon. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House.
Lewis, Jack P. The New Smith’s Bible Dictionary. Reuel Lemmons, reviser. Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Co.
Lightfoot, J. B. The Epistle of St. Paul to the Galatians. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.
Moulton, James and George Milligan. 1963. The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament. London, England: Hodder and Stoughton.
Pratt, D.M., The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, James Orr, ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1939), Vol. V.
Roberts, J. W. 1959. Restoration Quarterly, Vol. 3, No. 4, 4th Quarter.
Sproul, Robert C. 1976. Controversy at Culture Gap. Eternity, May.
Thayer, J. H.. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. Edinburgh, Scotland: T. & T. Clark.
White, Newport J. D. 1956. The Expositor’s Greek Testament. Vol. 4. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.
Woods, Guy N. 1976. Questions and Answers – Open Forum. Henderson TN: Freed-Hardeman College.
Zahn, Theodor, Introduction to the New Testament I (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1909), Vol. 1.
Bookmark and Share del.icio.us:Woman's Role in the Church facebook:Woman's Role in the Church stumbleupon:Woman's Role in the Church reddit:Woman's Role in the Church google:Woman's Role in the Church digg:Woman's Role in the Church magnolia:Woman's Role in the Church furl:Woman's Role in the Church newsvine:Woman's Role in the Church blinklist:Woman's Role in the Church blogmarks:Woman's Role in the Church simpy:Woman's Role in the Church
© 1997-2008 by Christian Courier Publications. All rights reserved. ISSN: 1559-2235. Website version: 2.0.0a
The Christian Courier is a journal dedicated to the study of religious doctrine, Christian evidences, and biblical ethics. It is associated with the churches of Christ.
--------------------
Strive to enter in at the strait gate:for many, I say unto you will seek to enter in, and shall not be able. ( Luke 13:24 )
Posts: 4578 | From: Southeast Texas | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Eden
unregistered
|
posted
hey, bluefrog, I really enjoyed your post in which you explained the "gals" yelling over to the "guys" and Paul saying, "shut up already willya, I'm trying to tell you something important, ask your husbands at home", etc. Very good. ![[wave3]](graemlins/18.gif)
Michael Harrison, I liked that comment about Kathryn Kuhlman saying (I paraphrase), "God tried to get many men to do it, but none would do it, so He finally settled on me (though I be out of order), to show them a thing or two about faith" (or whatever).
Matthew 3:9
And think not to say within yourselves, "We have Abraham as our father: for I say to you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.
love, Eden
IP: Logged |
|
|
bluefrog
unregistered
|
posted
what's that supposed to mean ?
I was just trying to say that I wasn't trying to defend women because I was one. I'm not.
Ooopy Doo back at ya.
IP: Logged |
|
|
Glory belongs to Him
Advanced Member
Member # 7432
|
posted
Bluefrog wrote:
quote:
By the way, I am a man.
OOOPY DOO! ![[happyhappy]](graemlins/happyhappy.gif) ![[roll on floor]](graemlins/6.gif)
--------------------
If you ever get so hungry for God that you are in pursuit of Him, He will do things for you that He won't do for anybody else.
Posts: 112 | From: USA | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged |
|
|
bluefrog
unregistered
|
posted
Mercy Sakes. Paul suggested a rule of order in a church service and look where it has gotten us.
Back there in the good ole' days when Paul was walkin and writin n' stuff somethin in the precious time he had when with his followers needed fixin. It was the practice then to sit the guys on one side and the gals on the other.
Paul would get all wound up with his teachings and likewise the congregation would too. What the problem was, is that the ladies would yell over to their old man and make comments or ask questions. Sometimes the guys would try to answer, sometimes not, but regardless, it would interrupt Paul. He said, Lookie Here YAll, if you ladies have questions hold them til ya get home. Who knows, maybe the guys had questions too but men in those days were pretty shovinistic don't ya see, so the blame had to go to the ladies.
And another thing. Some women don't wear jewelry to church because of a comment in the bible. Others wear scarfs on their heads when they enter church. Good Grief. Some rules are a good practice some of the time. What was said was..don't come in here dressed like a harlet and distract the men. When they come here to church we want their attention. So, ladies please don't overdo it, ok ? As for the scarfs on the head, that also has been taken totally out of context. There is nothing disrespectful about going into a church without a head covering.
And another thing...if a man marries a woman they are to become one. Doesn't that sort of make them equal ?
By the way, I am a man.
rivit
IP: Logged |
|
|
The Beauty of Holiness777
Advanced Member
Member # 7380
|
posted
Good Post!
It is unfortunated that modern feminisim has caused some women to resent their role and to see is as submissive or inferior.
Both the man and the woman are vital to a family
nevertheless, there has to be a head.
God chose the man to be the provider and protector and woman to be the comforter and nuturer. Both are vital and different, with different roles and responsibilities, but each is vital as a whole.
Even in spiritual gifts there is no difference. Leadership or headship does not necessarily assume superiority. It is a role.
God is the head of Christ, yet the two are the same.
--------------------
In God I'am Complete.
I am a "Spiritual Being" living in a physical body.
{Prayer - a force that reaches people and places when we can't}
Posts: 192 | From: God's Universe | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
|
|
Michael Harrison
Advanced Member
Member # 6801
|
posted
It is so easy to become legalistic or haughty in so many areas, and one of those areas so easily vulnerable to this is the issue of women in ministry. On the one hand I believe like so many, that women are not to 'usurp' the authority of a man. However, far too often, men are not the spiritual giants, and God raises up a 'good' woman to accomplish His goals. This is not a question of 'usurping' where God works so powerfully in a woman. It is as Kathryn Kuhlman once said in response to why God was using her so powerfully; for she was asked if it was not a man's responsibility which she attended to. She said, "God passed over a lot of men, no doubt, who did not want the responsibility, therefore it fell on her." Now I paraphrased for lack of memory, but I was touched by this site, and this testimony below. If you are not also, God help us because we are beyond mercy.
quote:
In the early fourth century, Catherine of Alexandria defended the faith at Alexandria before philosophers and courtiers, before she was tortured to death by Maxentius, the son of the Roman Emperor Maximian. At about the same time, Dorothy of Caesarea in Cappadocia was martyred (A.D. 313). As she was being led to her execution, Theophilus, a lawyer, taunted her, asking her for a basket of flowers and fruit. Soon afterward, a child came to her with a basket laden with roses and apples. She sent this to Theophilus, who as a result of this incident became a Christian and later gave his own life as a Martyr.
http://www.godswordtowomen.org/richardriss.htm
Posts: 3273 | From: Charlotte N.C. | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic
