Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,096 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 360,657
Pageviews Today: 458,100Threads Today: 101Posts Today: 1,684
04:16 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?

 
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 8541689
United States
05/02/2012 08:20 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
<< 1 Corinthians 11:6 >>

New International Version
If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head.
Monbazillac

User ID: 8958455
France
05/02/2012 08:22 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
this is what they did to the witches and the women who slept with the enemy or had children with them after all the wars...

public humiliation so cute yak
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 8541689
United States
05/02/2012 08:23 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
this is what they did to the witches and the women who slept with the enemy or had children with them after all the wars...

public humiliation so cute yak
 Quoting: Monbazillac


Haha
Sungaze_At_Dawn

User ID: 1458670
Canada
05/02/2012 08:24 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
Uh, sorry but that wasn't Jesus, sounds like PAUL, and he was a double agent for Rome.

Jesus was only covered in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

[link to www.thenazareneway.com]

This may open your eyes, for Luke gave some strong clues about who Paul was.

Last Edited by Sungaze_At_Dawn on 05/02/2012 08:25 PM
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 8541689
United States
05/02/2012 08:26 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
Uh, sorry but that wasn't Jesus, sounds like PAUL, and he was a double agent for Rome.

Jesus was only covered in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

[link to www.thenazareneway.com]

This may open your eyes, for Luke gave some strong clues about who Paul was.
 Quoting: Sungaze_At_Dawn


clappa ---Mathew ,mark ,Luke and john all were Freemasson
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1201807
United States
05/02/2012 08:27 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
Long hair is their covering, that is why women should have long hair.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 15440689
Australia
05/02/2012 08:28 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
<< 1 Corinthians 11:6 >>

New International Version
If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8541689


Jesus didnt say that.

PAUL did.

get your facts straight.
nocty

User ID: 3965385
United States
05/02/2012 08:31 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
jesus was a mushroom
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 8541689
United States
05/02/2012 08:32 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
<< 1 Corinthians 11:6 >>

New International Version
If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8541689


Jesus didnt say that.

PAUL did.

get your facts straight.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 15440689


<< 1 Corinthians 11:6 >>

New International Version
If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8541689


Jesus didnt say that.

PAUL did.

get your facts straight.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 15440689


Jesus said it and Paul recorded it---Are I saying what ever Paul said is false ?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 15440689
Australia
05/02/2012 08:33 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
<< 1 Corinthians 11:6 >>

New International Version
If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8541689


Jesus didnt say that.

PAUL did.

get your facts straight.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 15440689


<< 1 Corinthians 11:6 >>

New International Version
If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8541689


Jesus didnt say that.

PAUL did.

get your facts straight.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 15440689


Jesus said it and Paul recorded it---Are I saying what ever Paul said is false ?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8541689


Where did Jesus say it?

Cmon..chapter and verse.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 8541689
United States
05/02/2012 08:34 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
jesus was a mushroom
 Quoting: nocty


bsflag
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 15443368
United States
05/02/2012 08:38 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
You do realize Paul never met "Jesus", right?
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 8541689
United States
05/02/2012 08:39 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
HideReasons
Those espousing the practice of headcovering have used Apostle Paul's appeal to universal principles in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 to argue that since the passage mentions “every man” and “every woman,” as well as the universal order of creation, this passage must apply to all Christians in all ages and of all cultures.1 Corinthians 11.10 "For this cause ought the woman to have authority on her head because of the angels" ergo an argument can be made that if the angels are no longer in existence, then it no longer applies, but if there are still angels then it must still apply throughout all ages that angels exist. There are no Christian sects who dispute the continued existence of angels. Also, some Christians[who?] wear head coverings because Sarah (Abraham's wife) Genesis 20:16 and Rebekah (Isaac's wife) Genesis 24:65 wore head coverings.[27] They hold that the Bible is not merely referring to hair, long hair, or submission, but rather a literal cloth headcovering.[citation needed] They support this understanding from the original Greek, which uses two different words: one meaning covering, referring to the woman's head, i.e., her husband, and the other meaning veiling, referring to a literal cloth covering.[citation needed] 1 Corinthians 11:6 is also cited to refute the notion that the headcovering intended by Paul is merely long hair, ("For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.") because it would be akin to saying "If a woman has short hair, let her hair be cut short."[28]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 15412720
United States
05/02/2012 08:41 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
<< 1 Corinthians 11:6 >>

New International Version
If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8541689


Jesus never ever said such a thing. Your bible is full of falsehoods.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 15443368
United States
05/02/2012 08:42 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
What he, Paul, met was the beginning of the big switch-a-roo. "Jesus", as you call him, never went against YHVH or he would not have been the Messiah. BUT Paul took it upon himself to change everything "Jesus" said AND MOST IMPORTANTLY go against everything YHVH stated He wanted from "His people".

But then again this is just a baited thread so enjoy.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 8541689
United States
05/02/2012 08:42 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
You do realize Paul never met "Jesus", right?
 Quoting: Just_a_Mom


Yes
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 9425489
United States
05/02/2012 08:44 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
Christians in this thread finally admitting the bible is made up bullshit.

Jesus never said a thing in the bible obviously, all the books were written at least two generations after Christ's death.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 8541689
United States
05/02/2012 08:44 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
What he, Paul, met was the beginning of the big switch-a-roo. "Jesus", as you call him, never went against YHVH or he would not have been the Messiah. BUT Paul took it upon himself to change everything "Jesus" said AND MOST IMPORTANTLY go against everything YHVH stated He wanted from "His people".

But then again this is just a baited thread so enjoy.
 Quoting: Just_a_Mom


YHVH is never mention in Greek bible or aramanic bible ? Was god of bible ashamed to mention his name ? Or YHVH is anti-Christ?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 15440689
Australia
05/02/2012 08:53 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
...


Jesus didnt say that.

PAUL did.

get your facts straight.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 15440689


...


Jesus didnt say that.

PAUL did.

get your facts straight.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 15440689


Jesus said it and Paul recorded it---Are I saying what ever Paul said is false ?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8541689


Where did Jesus say it?

Cmon..chapter and verse.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 15440689
.
        I get so much mail asking the question on how I believe when it comes to Head Coverings. If it is a personal conviction of yours fine,I am not here to debate that. This is written according to what I believe the BIBLE (Our final authority) to say to ME. I am sure that this will prove to be an issue that many of us will have to agree to disagree, but just for the record here it is:

Wait! One more 'disclaimer' - NO, my hair is NOT this long,[nor my girls] I just loved this picture and decided it was perfect for here.

A covering? What was God telling us through Paul?
1 CORINTHIANS 11:6 -- "For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered."

        One of the problems with this passage is discerning the nature of the head covering required for the woman. It is obvious that God requires that the woman have a token of submission to authority on her head. She is to be covered. Verse 15 says her hair is given for a covering. There are two different interpretations which are commonly adopted in this regard: (1) The hair is intended to be the covering throughout the passage. (2) The hair is the natural covering, but there is to be an additional covering spoken of in verses 4-7.

I believe the first position is correct

        Those who believe verses 4-7 refer to a separate veil or head covering point to two things to prove their position: (a) The Greek word in verses 4-7 is different from that used in verse 15. (now dont go yelling at me, I dont use the Greek - im saying what 'others' use as their 'proof') I don't believe this is significant, though. Both words mean basically the same thing: a veil, a covering. The Authorized Version correctly translates both words by the same English word, "covering."

         I don't believe this proves that a different covering is referred to in verse 4-7 as in verse 15. The Greek New Testament frequently uses different Greek words as synonyms, just as we do in the English language. (b) The phrasing of verse 6, they say, proves that a covering separate from the hair is being discussed. This is a stronger argument, but I do not believe it is necessary to interpret verse 6 as speaking of a separate covering. I believe the verse means this: If a woman refuses to wear her hair long for a proper covering and token of authority, if she wants to bob it like a man's hair, let her go ahead and shave it all off. By saying this, the Apostle is emphasizing with the strongest language the seriousness of this matter. It is obvious that is not proper for a woman's head to be shaved.

        The Apostle's conclusion, therefore, is this: since it is disgraceful to be shaved, let the women be covered with their natural long hair. I believe there are some serious problems with the view that the woman's hair is to be covered with a separate covering or veil.

(1) If that is what the Apostle intended, why did he not give clear instructions about the nature of this separate covering? How large is it? What is its design? How is it worn? Someone might reply that the exact nature of the covering is not important, only the fact that some type of covering is used. Perhaps that is the case. It still seems strange to me that God would require a covering and not describe it for us. If, on the other hand, the covering is the hair itself, there would be no need to describe it (which further establishes my belief). The woman's natural long hair would be the covering. This is what I believe is the case.

(2) Similarly, if the Apostle intended to require women to wear a separate covering, why does the Scripture not give plain instructions as to exactly when and how these are to be worn? Is this covering only worn at church? Is it worn anytime the woman prays? Some groups which practice head coverings have devised long lists of laws about this. The problem is that they have set up a man-made legalism, because the Bible does not detail any instructions about coverings for women. (Quick deterant if you ask me, just keep thinking IF God says it i believe it,........ but did he?) If, on the other hand, the covering is the natural long hair itself, there is no need for detailed instructions. The woman wears her hair all of the time, so she has her proper covering at all times.

        It has been asked how this verse would apply to racial distinctives. My thoughts are that long hair on a woman in any race or culture would be in contrast to the men of that culture. Hair does differ according to race, but the women of any particular race can have long hair by contrast to the men of that race.

        Another question which invariably arises in the context of this passage is "How long is long?" It is similar to the question which long-haired men ask, "How short is short?" The answer is not difficult. Long hair on a woman, defined by this passage, is hair that is long enough to cover her head (11:6,15) and to mark her as distinctively female (11:14-15). The Bible does not say that she can never cut her hair. It does not say that her hair must be to her waist. It simply says it is to be long enough to be a covering of her head and to mark her as distinctively female in contrast to the man's short hair.

         If a woman's hair is short like a man's, she is dishonoring her head and is sowing confusion in the created realm. If there is any question as to whether or not her hair is too short, it is too short. There should be no question in the minds of those who observe us that we are obeying God's Word. The Lord exhorts us to approve things that are excellent, not things which are mediocre and borderline (Phil. 1:10).

1 CORINTHIANS 11:10 -- "For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels."

        Commentators often express amazement and great uncertainty at this verse. I am amazed at the amazement! Why should this verse be considered so difficult to understand? Admittedly, we do not understand it thoroughly; we do not understand all of its implications. Like all Scripture, though, this verse means exactly what it says. God has not chosen to reveal everything to us, but He has revealed that which He wants us to know (Deut. 29:29). In plain language, the Bible states that women ought to have the sign of authority on their heads because of the angels. The context leaves no doubt that this refers to the hair which has been given to the woman for a covering (verse 15). That is plainly what the Bible says. To cut her hair short and manly is to disgrace her head and is to bring confusion into the created order. This is not something intended only for churches of the first century, and it is not an instruction intended simply for a special situation which existed in the church at Corinth. The Apostle says the things taught in this Epistle are ordinances of God for all churches (1 Cor. 7:17; 11:1-2; 14:33,37). The Apostle's arguments are based on permanent facts which will not change as long as this present earthly economy exists.

1 CORINTHIANS 11:14-16 -- "Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering. But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God."

        In this passage (verse 1-15), the Apostle teaches the created distinction between the man and the woman, and he applies this distinction to the issue of appearance and worship. The man worships God with his head uncovered, because he is the image and glory of God. The woman worships God with her head covered, because she is in a subordinate position to the man and is the glory of the man. There are two views of the head covering. Some believe this is a separate veil or covering of some sort which is placed over the head. In these churches it is customary for the women to wear a veil over their hair. In South Asia, it is customary for women to pull their soirees over their heads in the church services, particularly during times of prayer. This portrays a lovely and submissive attitude, and is commended. The custom in Western culture that men remove their hats when entering a church is based on this passage. This is a proper custom. I believe, though, that the covering spoken of in this passage is the hair itself. Verse 15 says, "if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering." The hair is the natural covering God has given to the woman to signify her humility and submission. If she cuts it short, she is dishonoring herself and is displaying a rebellious spirit.

 Likewise, the man's hair is to be short to signify his headship under Christ. The Levites in the Old Testament had to keep their hair short (Ezek. 44:20).

        The meaning of 1 Corinthians 11:1-15 is not difficult to understand. What, though, does verse 16 mean? "If any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God." In the context, the contention would be over the issue of hair and the distinction between the man and the woman in position and authority. There is, of course, great contention on this subject in our day. Women are ignoring the biblical injunctions which restrict them from teaching men and from taking authority over men. Both men and women are ignoring the biblical injunction pertaining to the proper hair length and its significance. Women are cutting their hair short, and men are wearing their hair long, all the while professing to love and serve the Lord Jesus Christ. What is Paul saying in verse 16 about such contention? It appears that there are two possible meanings.

(1) It is possible that Paul is saying that the distinction between the man and the woman in position and authority and the significance of one's hair length is not very important and if someone does not agree with these things, the churches should not make an issue of it. If this is the meaning of verse 16, though, it would be a very strange thing. Why would God inspire this passage about authority and position and hair if it can be disregarded by the churches? If this is the meaning of verse 16, Paul would be saying, in essence, I have spent 15 verses teaching you the significance of hair length on a man and a woman, but it is not very important; and if you don't agree with it, we will not make an issue of it. I don't believe this is the meaning of the verse. Nowhere else in the Bible do we find the man of God telling us, "This is the will and law of God, but you are free to disagree with and ignore it if it doesn't suit you."

(2) I believe the true meaning of verse 16 is two-fold. First, it has to do with the spirit of contention itself. Paul is saying that if someone in the church is contentious about these matters, we have no such custom of contention. The church is not an institution in which each member can decide for himself what he will and will not obey in the New Testament Scriptures. In this same passage, in verse 2, Paul commended the Corinthian church for keeping the ordinances he had delivered to them. It makes no sense for him to say now that they are at liberty to disagree with the things he is teaching. In 1 Corinthians 14:37 he tells them that the things he was writing to them are the commandments of the Lord. The things Paul wrote in His epistles are for all churches of every century. Second, verse 16 is saying that if any person is contentious about these matters and claims that it is proper for a woman to have authority over men or to wear her hair short like a man, such an one should consider the custom of the churches. It was customary in all of the churches for women to assume a position of submission to the man and to wear their hair long as a symbol of their submission. Thus Paul concluded this subject by strengthening his argument in pointing to general custom among the apostles and churches.

Well there you have it ;-)

Chris
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8541689


You ask a simple question..and get the whole fucking BIBLE thrown at you in response.

Its no wonder no one has time for christians these days.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 8541689
United States
05/02/2012 08:54 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
...


...


Jesus said it and Paul recorded it---Are I saying what ever Paul said is false ?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8541689


Where did Jesus say it?

Cmon..chapter and verse.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 15440689
.
        I get so much mail asking the question on how I believe when it comes to Head Coverings. If it is a personal conviction of yours fine,I am not here to debate that. This is written according to what I believe the BIBLE (Our final authority) to say to ME. I am sure that this will prove to be an issue that many of us will have to agree to disagree, but just for the record here it is:

Wait! One more 'disclaimer' - NO, my hair is NOT this long,[nor my girls] I just loved this picture and decided it was perfect for here.

A covering? What was God telling us through Paul?
1 CORINTHIANS 11:6 -- "For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered."

        One of the problems with this passage is discerning the nature of the head covering required for the woman. It is obvious that God requires that the woman have a token of submission to authority on her head. She is to be covered. Verse 15 says her hair is given for a covering. There are two different interpretations which are commonly adopted in this regard: (1) The hair is intended to be the covering throughout the passage. (2) The hair is the natural covering, but there is to be an additional covering spoken of in verses 4-7.

I believe the first position is correct

        Those who believe verses 4-7 refer to a separate veil or head covering point to two things to prove their position: (a) The Greek word in verses 4-7 is different from that used in verse 15. (now dont go yelling at me, I dont use the Greek - im saying what 'others' use as their 'proof') I don't believe this is significant, though. Both words mean basically the same thing: a veil, a covering. The Authorized Version correctly translates both words by the same English word, "covering."

         I don't believe this proves that a different covering is referred to in verse 4-7 as in verse 15. The Greek New Testament frequently uses different Greek words as synonyms, just as we do in the English language. (b) The phrasing of verse 6, they say, proves that a covering separate from the hair is being discussed. This is a stronger argument, but I do not believe it is necessary to interpret verse 6 as speaking of a separate covering. I believe the verse means this: If a woman refuses to wear her hair long for a proper covering and token of authority, if she wants to bob it like a man's hair, let her go ahead and shave it all off. By saying this, the Apostle is emphasizing with the strongest language the seriousness of this matter. It is obvious that is not proper for a woman's head to be shaved.

        The Apostle's conclusion, therefore, is this: since it is disgraceful to be shaved, let the women be covered with their natural long hair. I believe there are some serious problems with the view that the woman's hair is to be covered with a separate covering or veil.

(1) If that is what the Apostle intended, why did he not give clear instructions about the nature of this separate covering? How large is it? What is its design? How is it worn? Someone might reply that the exact nature of the covering is not important, only the fact that some type of covering is used. Perhaps that is the case. It still seems strange to me that God would require a covering and not describe it for us. If, on the other hand, the covering is the hair itself, there would be no need to describe it (which further establishes my belief). The woman's natural long hair would be the covering. This is what I believe is the case.

(2) Similarly, if the Apostle intended to require women to wear a separate covering, why does the Scripture not give plain instructions as to exactly when and how these are to be worn? Is this covering only worn at church? Is it worn anytime the woman prays? Some groups which practice head coverings have devised long lists of laws about this. The problem is that they have set up a man-made legalism, because the Bible does not detail any instructions about coverings for women. (Quick deterant if you ask me, just keep thinking IF God says it i believe it,........ but did he?) If, on the other hand, the covering is the natural long hair itself, there is no need for detailed instructions. The woman wears her hair all of the time, so she has her proper covering at all times.

        It has been asked how this verse would apply to racial distinctives. My thoughts are that long hair on a woman in any race or culture would be in contrast to the men of that culture. Hair does differ according to race, but the women of any particular race can have long hair by contrast to the men of that race.

        Another question which invariably arises in the context of this passage is "How long is long?" It is similar to the question which long-haired men ask, "How short is short?" The answer is not difficult. Long hair on a woman, defined by this passage, is hair that is long enough to cover her head (11:6,15) and to mark her as distinctively female (11:14-15). The Bible does not say that she can never cut her hair. It does not say that her hair must be to her waist. It simply says it is to be long enough to be a covering of her head and to mark her as distinctively female in contrast to the man's short hair.

         If a woman's hair is short like a man's, she is dishonoring her head and is sowing confusion in the created realm. If there is any question as to whether or not her hair is too short, it is too short. There should be no question in the minds of those who observe us that we are obeying God's Word. The Lord exhorts us to approve things that are excellent, not things which are mediocre and borderline (Phil. 1:10).

1 CORINTHIANS 11:10 -- "For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels."

        Commentators often express amazement and great uncertainty at this verse. I am amazed at the amazement! Why should this verse be considered so difficult to understand? Admittedly, we do not understand it thoroughly; we do not understand all of its implications. Like all Scripture, though, this verse means exactly what it says. God has not chosen to reveal everything to us, but He has revealed that which He wants us to know (Deut. 29:29). In plain language, the Bible states that women ought to have the sign of authority on their heads because of the angels. The context leaves no doubt that this refers to the hair which has been given to the woman for a covering (verse 15). That is plainly what the Bible says. To cut her hair short and manly is to disgrace her head and is to bring confusion into the created order. This is not something intended only for churches of the first century, and it is not an instruction intended simply for a special situation which existed in the church at Corinth. The Apostle says the things taught in this Epistle are ordinances of God for all churches (1 Cor. 7:17; 11:1-2; 14:33,37). The Apostle's arguments are based on permanent facts which will not change as long as this present earthly economy exists.

1 CORINTHIANS 11:14-16 -- "Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering. But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God."

        In this passage (verse 1-15), the Apostle teaches the created distinction between the man and the woman, and he applies this distinction to the issue of appearance and worship. The man worships God with his head uncovered, because he is the image and glory of God. The woman worships God with her head covered, because she is in a subordinate position to the man and is the glory of the man. There are two views of the head covering. Some believe this is a separate veil or covering of some sort which is placed over the head. In these churches it is customary for the women to wear a veil over their hair. In South Asia, it is customary for women to pull their soirees over their heads in the church services, particularly during times of prayer. This portrays a lovely and submissive attitude, and is commended. The custom in Western culture that men remove their hats when entering a church is based on this passage. This is a proper custom. I believe, though, that the covering spoken of in this passage is the hair itself. Verse 15 says, "if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering." The hair is the natural covering God has given to the woman to signify her humility and submission. If she cuts it short, she is dishonoring herself and is displaying a rebellious spirit.

 Likewise, the man's hair is to be short to signify his headship under Christ. The Levites in the Old Testament had to keep their hair short (Ezek. 44:20).

        The meaning of 1 Corinthians 11:1-15 is not difficult to understand. What, though, does verse 16 mean? "If any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God." In the context, the contention would be over the issue of hair and the distinction between the man and the woman in position and authority. There is, of course, great contention on this subject in our day. Women are ignoring the biblical injunctions which restrict them from teaching men and from taking authority over men. Both men and women are ignoring the biblical injunction pertaining to the proper hair length and its significance. Women are cutting their hair short, and men are wearing their hair long, all the while professing to love and serve the Lord Jesus Christ. What is Paul saying in verse 16 about such contention? It appears that there are two possible meanings.

(1) It is possible that Paul is saying that the distinction between the man and the woman in position and authority and the significance of one's hair length is not very important and if someone does not agree with these things, the churches should not make an issue of it. If this is the meaning of verse 16, though, it would be a very strange thing. Why would God inspire this passage about authority and position and hair if it can be disregarded by the churches? If this is the meaning of verse 16, Paul would be saying, in essence, I have spent 15 verses teaching you the significance of hair length on a man and a woman, but it is not very important; and if you don't agree with it, we will not make an issue of it. I don't believe this is the meaning of the verse. Nowhere else in the Bible do we find the man of God telling us, "This is the will and law of God, but you are free to disagree with and ignore it if it doesn't suit you."

(2) I believe the true meaning of verse 16 is two-fold. First, it has to do with the spirit of contention itself. Paul is saying that if someone in the church is contentious about these matters, we have no such custom of contention. The church is not an institution in which each member can decide for himself what he will and will not obey in the New Testament Scriptures. In this same passage, in verse 2, Paul commended the Corinthian church for keeping the ordinances he had delivered to them. It makes no sense for him to say now that they are at liberty to disagree with the things he is teaching. In 1 Corinthians 14:37 he tells them that the things he was writing to them are the commandments of the Lord. The things Paul wrote in His epistles are for all churches of every century. Second, verse 16 is saying that if any person is contentious about these matters and claims that it is proper for a woman to have authority over men or to wear her hair short like a man, such an one should consider the custom of the churches. It was customary in all of the churches for women to assume a position of submission to the man and to wear their hair long as a symbol of their submission. Thus Paul concluded this subject by strengthening his argument in pointing to general custom among the apostles and churches.

Well there you have it ;-)

Chris
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8541689


You ask a simple question..and get the whole fucking BIBLE thrown at you in response.

Its no wonder no one has time for christians these days.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 15440689


...


...


Jesus said it and Paul recorded it---Are I saying what ever Paul said is false ?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8541689


Where did Jesus say it?

Cmon..chapter and verse.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 15440689
.
        I get so much mail asking the question on how I believe when it comes to Head Coverings. If it is a personal conviction of yours fine,I am not here to debate that. This is written according to what I believe the BIBLE (Our final authority) to say to ME. I am sure that this will prove to be an issue that many of us will have to agree to disagree, but just for the record here it is:

Wait! One more 'disclaimer' - NO, my hair is NOT this long,[nor my girls] I just loved this picture and decided it was perfect for here.

A covering? What was God telling us through Paul?
1 CORINTHIANS 11:6 -- "For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered."

        One of the problems with this passage is discerning the nature of the head covering required for the woman. It is obvious that God requires that the woman have a token of submission to authority on her head. She is to be covered. Verse 15 says her hair is given for a covering. There are two different interpretations which are commonly adopted in this regard: (1) The hair is intended to be the covering throughout the passage. (2) The hair is the natural covering, but there is to be an additional covering spoken of in verses 4-7.

I believe the first position is correct

        Those who believe verses 4-7 refer to a separate veil or head covering point to two things to prove their position: (a) The Greek word in verses 4-7 is different from that used in verse 15. (now dont go yelling at me, I dont use the Greek - im saying what 'others' use as their 'proof') I don't believe this is significant, though. Both words mean basically the same thing: a veil, a covering. The Authorized Version correctly translates both words by the same English word, "covering."

         I don't believe this proves that a different covering is referred to in verse 4-7 as in verse 15. The Greek New Testament frequently uses different Greek words as synonyms, just as we do in the English language. (b) The phrasing of verse 6, they say, proves that a covering separate from the hair is being discussed. This is a stronger argument, but I do not believe it is necessary to interpret verse 6 as speaking of a separate covering. I believe the verse means this: If a woman refuses to wear her hair long for a proper covering and token of authority, if she wants to bob it like a man's hair, let her go ahead and shave it all off. By saying this, the Apostle is emphasizing with the strongest language the seriousness of this matter. It is obvious that is not proper for a woman's head to be shaved.

        The Apostle's conclusion, therefore, is this: since it is disgraceful to be shaved, let the women be covered with their natural long hair. I believe there are some serious problems with the view that the woman's hair is to be covered with a separate covering or veil.

(1) If that is what the Apostle intended, why did he not give clear instructions about the nature of this separate covering? How large is it? What is its design? How is it worn? Someone might reply that the exact nature of the covering is not important, only the fact that some type of covering is used. Perhaps that is the case. It still seems strange to me that God would require a covering and not describe it for us. If, on the other hand, the covering is the hair itself, there would be no need to describe it (which further establishes my belief). The woman's natural long hair would be the covering. This is what I believe is the case.

(2) Similarly, if the Apostle intended to require women to wear a separate covering, why does the Scripture not give plain instructions as to exactly when and how these are to be worn? Is this covering only worn at church? Is it worn anytime the woman prays? Some groups which practice head coverings have devised long lists of laws about this. The problem is that they have set up a man-made legalism, because the Bible does not detail any instructions about coverings for women. (Quick deterant if you ask me, just keep thinking IF God says it i believe it,........ but did he?) If, on the other hand, the covering is the natural long hair itself, there is no need for detailed instructions. The woman wears her hair all of the time, so she has her proper covering at all times.

        It has been asked how this verse would apply to racial distinctives. My thoughts are that long hair on a woman in any race or culture would be in contrast to the men of that culture. Hair does differ according to race, but the women of any particular race can have long hair by contrast to the men of that race.

        Another question which invariably arises in the context of this passage is "How long is long?" It is similar to the question which long-haired men ask, "How short is short?" The answer is not difficult. Long hair on a woman, defined by this passage, is hair that is long enough to cover her head (11:6,15) and to mark her as distinctively female (11:14-15). The Bible does not say that she can never cut her hair. It does not say that her hair must be to her waist. It simply says it is to be long enough to be a covering of her head and to mark her as distinctively female in contrast to the man's short hair.

         If a woman's hair is short like a man's, she is dishonoring her head and is sowing confusion in the created realm. If there is any question as to whether or not her hair is too short, it is too short. There should be no question in the minds of those who observe us that we are obeying God's Word. The Lord exhorts us to approve things that are excellent, not things which are mediocre and borderline (Phil. 1:10).

1 CORINTHIANS 11:10 -- "For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels."

        Commentators often express amazement and great uncertainty at this verse. I am amazed at the amazement! Why should this verse be considered so difficult to understand? Admittedly, we do not understand it thoroughly; we do not understand all of its implications. Like all Scripture, though, this verse means exactly what it says. God has not chosen to reveal everything to us, but He has revealed that which He wants us to know (Deut. 29:29). In plain language, the Bible states that women ought to have the sign of authority on their heads because of the angels. The context leaves no doubt that this refers to the hair which has been given to the woman for a covering (verse 15). That is plainly what the Bible says. To cut her hair short and manly is to disgrace her head and is to bring confusion into the created order. This is not something intended only for churches of the first century, and it is not an instruction intended simply for a special situation which existed in the church at Corinth. The Apostle says the things taught in this Epistle are ordinances of God for all churches (1 Cor. 7:17; 11:1-2; 14:33,37). The Apostle's arguments are based on permanent facts which will not change as long as this present earthly economy exists.

1 CORINTHIANS 11:14-16 -- "Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering. But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God."

        In this passage (verse 1-15), the Apostle teaches the created distinction between the man and the woman, and he applies this distinction to the issue of appearance and worship. The man worships God with his head uncovered, because he is the image and glory of God. The woman worships God with her head covered, because she is in a subordinate position to the man and is the glory of the man. There are two views of the head covering. Some believe this is a separate veil or covering of some sort which is placed over the head. In these churches it is customary for the women to wear a veil over their hair. In South Asia, it is customary for women to pull their soirees over their heads in the church services, particularly during times of prayer. This portrays a lovely and submissive attitude, and is commended. The custom in Western culture that men remove their hats when entering a church is based on this passage. This is a proper custom. I believe, though, that the covering spoken of in this passage is the hair itself. Verse 15 says, "if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering." The hair is the natural covering God has given to the woman to signify her humility and submission. If she cuts it short, she is dishonoring herself and is displaying a rebellious spirit.

 Likewise, the man's hair is to be short to signify his headship under Christ. The Levites in the Old Testament had to keep their hair short (Ezek. 44:20).

        The meaning of 1 Corinthians 11:1-15 is not difficult to understand. What, though, does verse 16 mean? "If any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God." In the context, the contention would be over the issue of hair and the distinction between the man and the woman in position and authority. There is, of course, great contention on this subject in our day. Women are ignoring the biblical injunctions which restrict them from teaching men and from taking authority over men. Both men and women are ignoring the biblical injunction pertaining to the proper hair length and its significance. Women are cutting their hair short, and men are wearing their hair long, all the while professing to love and serve the Lord Jesus Christ. What is Paul saying in verse 16 about such contention? It appears that there are two possible meanings.

(1) It is possible that Paul is saying that the distinction between the man and the woman in position and authority and the significance of one's hair length is not very important and if someone does not agree with these things, the churches should not make an issue of it. If this is the meaning of verse 16, though, it would be a very strange thing. Why would God inspire this passage about authority and position and hair if it can be disregarded by the churches? If this is the meaning of verse 16, Paul would be saying, in essence, I have spent 15 verses teaching you the significance of hair length on a man and a woman, but it is not very important; and if you don't agree with it, we will not make an issue of it. I don't believe this is the meaning of the verse. Nowhere else in the Bible do we find the man of God telling us, "This is the will and law of God, but you are free to disagree with and ignore it if it doesn't suit you."

(2) I believe the true meaning of verse 16 is two-fold. First, it has to do with the spirit of contention itself. Paul is saying that if someone in the church is contentious about these matters, we have no such custom of contention. The church is not an institution in which each member can decide for himself what he will and will not obey in the New Testament Scriptures. In this same passage, in verse 2, Paul commended the Corinthian church for keeping the ordinances he had delivered to them. It makes no sense for him to say now that they are at liberty to disagree with the things he is teaching. In 1 Corinthians 14:37 he tells them that the things he was writing to them are the commandments of the Lord. The things Paul wrote in His epistles are for all churches of every century. Second, verse 16 is saying that if any person is contentious about these matters and claims that it is proper for a woman to have authority over men or to wear her hair short like a man, such an one should consider the custom of the churches. It was customary in all of the churches for women to assume a position of submission to the man and to wear their hair long as a symbol of their submission. Thus Paul concluded this subject by strengthening his argument in pointing to general custom among the apostles and churches.

Well there you have it ;-)

Chris
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8541689


You ask a simple question..and get the whole fucking BIBLE thrown at you in response.

Its no wonder no one has time for christians these days.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 15440689


whatever
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 15440689
Australia
05/02/2012 08:57 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
...


Where did Jesus say it?

Cmon..chapter and verse.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 15440689
.
        I get so much mail asking the question on how I believe when it comes to Head Coverings. If it is a personal conviction of yours fine,I am not here to debate that. This is written according to what I believe the BIBLE (Our final authority) to say to ME. I am sure that this will prove to be an issue that many of us will have to agree to disagree, but just for the record here it is:

Wait! One more 'disclaimer' - NO, my hair is NOT this long,[nor my girls] I just loved this picture and decided it was perfect for here.

A covering? What was God telling us through Paul?
1 CORINTHIANS 11:6 -- "For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered."

        One of the problems with this passage is discerning the nature of the head covering required for the woman. It is obvious that God requires that the woman have a token of submission to authority on her head. She is to be covered. Verse 15 says her hair is given for a covering. There are two different interpretations which are commonly adopted in this regard: (1) The hair is intended to be the covering throughout the passage. (2) The hair is the natural covering, but there is to be an additional covering spoken of in verses 4-7.

I believe the first position is correct

        Those who believe verses 4-7 refer to a separate veil or head covering point to two things to prove their position: (a) The Greek word in verses 4-7 is different from that used in verse 15. (now dont go yelling at me, I dont use the Greek - im saying what 'others' use as their 'proof') I don't believe this is significant, though. Both words mean basically the same thing: a veil, a covering. The Authorized Version correctly translates both words by the same English word, "covering."

         I don't believe this proves that a different covering is referred to in verse 4-7 as in verse 15. The Greek New Testament frequently uses different Greek words as synonyms, just as we do in the English language. (b) The phrasing of verse 6, they say, proves that a covering separate from the hair is being discussed. This is a stronger argument, but I do not believe it is necessary to interpret verse 6 as speaking of a separate covering. I believe the verse means this: If a woman refuses to wear her hair long for a proper covering and token of authority, if she wants to bob it like a man's hair, let her go ahead and shave it all off. By saying this, the Apostle is emphasizing with the strongest language the seriousness of this matter. It is obvious that is not proper for a woman's head to be shaved.

        The Apostle's conclusion, therefore, is this: since it is disgraceful to be shaved, let the women be covered with their natural long hair. I believe there are some serious problems with the view that the woman's hair is to be covered with a separate covering or veil.

(1) If that is what the Apostle intended, why did he not give clear instructions about the nature of this separate covering? How large is it? What is its design? How is it worn? Someone might reply that the exact nature of the covering is not important, only the fact that some type of covering is used. Perhaps that is the case. It still seems strange to me that God would require a covering and not describe it for us. If, on the other hand, the covering is the hair itself, there would be no need to describe it (which further establishes my belief). The woman's natural long hair would be the covering. This is what I believe is the case.

(2) Similarly, if the Apostle intended to require women to wear a separate covering, why does the Scripture not give plain instructions as to exactly when and how these are to be worn? Is this covering only worn at church? Is it worn anytime the woman prays? Some groups which practice head coverings have devised long lists of laws about this. The problem is that they have set up a man-made legalism, because the Bible does not detail any instructions about coverings for women. (Quick deterant if you ask me, just keep thinking IF God says it i believe it,........ but did he?) If, on the other hand, the covering is the natural long hair itself, there is no need for detailed instructions. The woman wears her hair all of the time, so she has her proper covering at all times.

        It has been asked how this verse would apply to racial distinctives. My thoughts are that long hair on a woman in any race or culture would be in contrast to the men of that culture. Hair does differ according to race, but the women of any particular race can have long hair by contrast to the men of that race.

        Another question which invariably arises in the context of this passage is "How long is long?" It is similar to the question which long-haired men ask, "How short is short?" The answer is not difficult. Long hair on a woman, defined by this passage, is hair that is long enough to cover her head (11:6,15) and to mark her as distinctively female (11:14-15). The Bible does not say that she can never cut her hair. It does not say that her hair must be to her waist. It simply says it is to be long enough to be a covering of her head and to mark her as distinctively female in contrast to the man's short hair.

         If a woman's hair is short like a man's, she is dishonoring her head and is sowing confusion in the created realm. If there is any question as to whether or not her hair is too short, it is too short. There should be no question in the minds of those who observe us that we are obeying God's Word. The Lord exhorts us to approve things that are excellent, not things which are mediocre and borderline (Phil. 1:10).

1 CORINTHIANS 11:10 -- "For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels."

        Commentators often express amazement and great uncertainty at this verse. I am amazed at the amazement! Why should this verse be considered so difficult to understand? Admittedly, we do not understand it thoroughly; we do not understand all of its implications. Like all Scripture, though, this verse means exactly what it says. God has not chosen to reveal everything to us, but He has revealed that which He wants us to know (Deut. 29:29). In plain language, the Bible states that women ought to have the sign of authority on their heads because of the angels. The context leaves no doubt that this refers to the hair which has been given to the woman for a covering (verse 15). That is plainly what the Bible says. To cut her hair short and manly is to disgrace her head and is to bring confusion into the created order. This is not something intended only for churches of the first century, and it is not an instruction intended simply for a special situation which existed in the church at Corinth. The Apostle says the things taught in this Epistle are ordinances of God for all churches (1 Cor. 7:17; 11:1-2; 14:33,37). The Apostle's arguments are based on permanent facts which will not change as long as this present earthly economy exists.

1 CORINTHIANS 11:14-16 -- "Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering. But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God."

        In this passage (verse 1-15), the Apostle teaches the created distinction between the man and the woman, and he applies this distinction to the issue of appearance and worship. The man worships God with his head uncovered, because he is the image and glory of God. The woman worships God with her head covered, because she is in a subordinate position to the man and is the glory of the man. There are two views of the head covering. Some believe this is a separate veil or covering of some sort which is placed over the head. In these churches it is customary for the women to wear a veil over their hair. In South Asia, it is customary for women to pull their soirees over their heads in the church services, particularly during times of prayer. This portrays a lovely and submissive attitude, and is commended. The custom in Western culture that men remove their hats when entering a church is based on this passage. This is a proper custom. I believe, though, that the covering spoken of in this passage is the hair itself. Verse 15 says, "if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering." The hair is the natural covering God has given to the woman to signify her humility and submission. If she cuts it short, she is dishonoring herself and is displaying a rebellious spirit.

 Likewise, the man's hair is to be short to signify his headship under Christ. The Levites in the Old Testament had to keep their hair short (Ezek. 44:20).

        The meaning of 1 Corinthians 11:1-15 is not difficult to understand. What, though, does verse 16 mean? "If any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God." In the context, the contention would be over the issue of hair and the distinction between the man and the woman in position and authority. There is, of course, great contention on this subject in our day. Women are ignoring the biblical injunctions which restrict them from teaching men and from taking authority over men. Both men and women are ignoring the biblical injunction pertaining to the proper hair length and its significance. Women are cutting their hair short, and men are wearing their hair long, all the while professing to love and serve the Lord Jesus Christ. What is Paul saying in verse 16 about such contention? It appears that there are two possible meanings.

(1) It is possible that Paul is saying that the distinction between the man and the woman in position and authority and the significance of one's hair length is not very important and if someone does not agree with these things, the churches should not make an issue of it. If this is the meaning of verse 16, though, it would be a very strange thing. Why would God inspire this passage about authority and position and hair if it can be disregarded by the churches? If this is the meaning of verse 16, Paul would be saying, in essence, I have spent 15 verses teaching you the significance of hair length on a man and a woman, but it is not very important; and if you don't agree with it, we will not make an issue of it. I don't believe this is the meaning of the verse. Nowhere else in the Bible do we find the man of God telling us, "This is the will and law of God, but you are free to disagree with and ignore it if it doesn't suit you."

(2) I believe the true meaning of verse 16 is two-fold. First, it has to do with the spirit of contention itself. Paul is saying that if someone in the church is contentious about these matters, we have no such custom of contention. The church is not an institution in which each member can decide for himself what he will and will not obey in the New Testament Scriptures. In this same passage, in verse 2, Paul commended the Corinthian church for keeping the ordinances he had delivered to them. It makes no sense for him to say now that they are at liberty to disagree with the things he is teaching. In 1 Corinthians 14:37 he tells them that the things he was writing to them are the commandments of the Lord. The things Paul wrote in His epistles are for all churches of every century. Second, verse 16 is saying that if any person is contentious about these matters and claims that it is proper for a woman to have authority over men or to wear her hair short like a man, such an one should consider the custom of the churches. It was customary in all of the churches for women to assume a position of submission to the man and to wear their hair long as a symbol of their submission. Thus Paul concluded this subject by strengthening his argument in pointing to general custom among the apostles and churches.

Well there you have it ;-)

Chris
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8541689


You ask a simple question..and get the whole fucking BIBLE thrown at you in response.

Its no wonder no one has time for christians these days.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 15440689


...


Where did Jesus say it?

Cmon..chapter and verse.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 15440689
.
        I get so much mail asking the question on how I believe when it comes to Head Coverings. If it is a personal conviction of yours fine,I am not here to debate that. This is written according to what I believe the BIBLE (Our final authority) to say to ME. I am sure that this will prove to be an issue that many of us will have to agree to disagree, but just for the record here it is:

Wait! One more 'disclaimer' - NO, my hair is NOT this long,[nor my girls] I just loved this picture and decided it was perfect for here.

A covering? What was God telling us through Paul?
1 CORINTHIANS 11:6 -- "For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered."

        One of the problems with this passage is discerning the nature of the head covering required for the woman. It is obvious that God requires that the woman have a token of submission to authority on her head. She is to be covered. Verse 15 says her hair is given for a covering. There are two different interpretations which are commonly adopted in this regard: (1) The hair is intended to be the covering throughout the passage. (2) The hair is the natural covering, but there is to be an additional covering spoken of in verses 4-7.

I believe the first position is correct

        Those who believe verses 4-7 refer to a separate veil or head covering point to two things to prove their position: (a) The Greek word in verses 4-7 is different from that used in verse 15. (now dont go yelling at me, I dont use the Greek - im saying what 'others' use as their 'proof') I don't believe this is significant, though. Both words mean basically the same thing: a veil, a covering. The Authorized Version correctly translates both words by the same English word, "covering."

         I don't believe this proves that a different covering is referred to in verse 4-7 as in verse 15. The Greek New Testament frequently uses different Greek words as synonyms, just as we do in the English language. (b) The phrasing of verse 6, they say, proves that a covering separate from the hair is being discussed. This is a stronger argument, but I do not believe it is necessary to interpret verse 6 as speaking of a separate covering. I believe the verse means this: If a woman refuses to wear her hair long for a proper covering and token of authority, if she wants to bob it like a man's hair, let her go ahead and shave it all off. By saying this, the Apostle is emphasizing with the strongest language the seriousness of this matter. It is obvious that is not proper for a woman's head to be shaved.

        The Apostle's conclusion, therefore, is this: since it is disgraceful to be shaved, let the women be covered with their natural long hair. I believe there are some serious problems with the view that the woman's hair is to be covered with a separate covering or veil.

(1) If that is what the Apostle intended, why did he not give clear instructions about the nature of this separate covering? How large is it? What is its design? How is it worn? Someone might reply that the exact nature of the covering is not important, only the fact that some type of covering is used. Perhaps that is the case. It still seems strange to me that God would require a covering and not describe it for us. If, on the other hand, the covering is the hair itself, there would be no need to describe it (which further establishes my belief). The woman's natural long hair would be the covering. This is what I believe is the case.

(2) Similarly, if the Apostle intended to require women to wear a separate covering, why does the Scripture not give plain instructions as to exactly when and how these are to be worn? Is this covering only worn at church? Is it worn anytime the woman prays? Some groups which practice head coverings have devised long lists of laws about this. The problem is that they have set up a man-made legalism, because the Bible does not detail any instructions about coverings for women. (Quick deterant if you ask me, just keep thinking IF God says it i believe it,........ but did he?) If, on the other hand, the covering is the natural long hair itself, there is no need for detailed instructions. The woman wears her hair all of the time, so she has her proper covering at all times.

        It has been asked how this verse would apply to racial distinctives. My thoughts are that long hair on a woman in any race or culture would be in contrast to the men of that culture. Hair does differ according to race, but the women of any particular race can have long hair by contrast to the men of that race.

        Another question which invariably arises in the context of this passage is "How long is long?" It is similar to the question which long-haired men ask, "How short is short?" The answer is not difficult. Long hair on a woman, defined by this passage, is hair that is long enough to cover her head (11:6,15) and to mark her as distinctively female (11:14-15). The Bible does not say that she can never cut her hair. It does not say that her hair must be to her waist. It simply says it is to be long enough to be a covering of her head and to mark her as distinctively female in contrast to the man's short hair.

         If a woman's hair is short like a man's, she is dishonoring her head and is sowing confusion in the created realm. If there is any question as to whether or not her hair is too short, it is too short. There should be no question in the minds of those who observe us that we are obeying God's Word. The Lord exhorts us to approve things that are excellent, not things which are mediocre and borderline (Phil. 1:10).

1 CORINTHIANS 11:10 -- "For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels."

        Commentators often express amazement and great uncertainty at this verse. I am amazed at the amazement! Why should this verse be considered so difficult to understand? Admittedly, we do not understand it thoroughly; we do not understand all of its implications. Like all Scripture, though, this verse means exactly what it says. God has not chosen to reveal everything to us, but He has revealed that which He wants us to know (Deut. 29:29). In plain language, the Bible states that women ought to have the sign of authority on their heads because of the angels. The context leaves no doubt that this refers to the hair which has been given to the woman for a covering (verse 15). That is plainly what the Bible says. To cut her hair short and manly is to disgrace her head and is to bring confusion into the created order. This is not something intended only for churches of the first century, and it is not an instruction intended simply for a special situation which existed in the church at Corinth. The Apostle says the things taught in this Epistle are ordinances of God for all churches (1 Cor. 7:17; 11:1-2; 14:33,37). The Apostle's arguments are based on permanent facts which will not change as long as this present earthly economy exists.

1 CORINTHIANS 11:14-16 -- "Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering. But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God."

        In this passage (verse 1-15), the Apostle teaches the created distinction between the man and the woman, and he applies this distinction to the issue of appearance and worship. The man worships God with his head uncovered, because he is the image and glory of God. The woman worships God with her head covered, because she is in a subordinate position to the man and is the glory of the man. There are two views of the head covering. Some believe this is a separate veil or covering of some sort which is placed over the head. In these churches it is customary for the women to wear a veil over their hair. In South Asia, it is customary for women to pull their soirees over their heads in the church services, particularly during times of prayer. This portrays a lovely and submissive attitude, and is commended. The custom in Western culture that men remove their hats when entering a church is based on this passage. This is a proper custom. I believe, though, that the covering spoken of in this passage is the hair itself. Verse 15 says, "if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering." The hair is the natural covering God has given to the woman to signify her humility and submission. If she cuts it short, she is dishonoring herself and is displaying a rebellious spirit.

 Likewise, the man's hair is to be short to signify his headship under Christ. The Levites in the Old Testament had to keep their hair short (Ezek. 44:20).

        The meaning of 1 Corinthians 11:1-15 is not difficult to understand. What, though, does verse 16 mean? "If any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God." In the context, the contention would be over the issue of hair and the distinction between the man and the woman in position and authority. There is, of course, great contention on this subject in our day. Women are ignoring the biblical injunctions which restrict them from teaching men and from taking authority over men. Both men and women are ignoring the biblical injunction pertaining to the proper hair length and its significance. Women are cutting their hair short, and men are wearing their hair long, all the while professing to love and serve the Lord Jesus Christ. What is Paul saying in verse 16 about such contention? It appears that there are two possible meanings.

(1) It is possible that Paul is saying that the distinction between the man and the woman in position and authority and the significance of one's hair length is not very important and if someone does not agree with these things, the churches should not make an issue of it. If this is the meaning of verse 16, though, it would be a very strange thing. Why would God inspire this passage about authority and position and hair if it can be disregarded by the churches? If this is the meaning of verse 16, Paul would be saying, in essence, I have spent 15 verses teaching you the significance of hair length on a man and a woman, but it is not very important; and if you don't agree with it, we will not make an issue of it. I don't believe this is the meaning of the verse. Nowhere else in the Bible do we find the man of God telling us, "This is the will and law of God, but you are free to disagree with and ignore it if it doesn't suit you."

(2) I believe the true meaning of verse 16 is two-fold. First, it has to do with the spirit of contention itself. Paul is saying that if someone in the church is contentious about these matters, we have no such custom of contention. The church is not an institution in which each member can decide for himself what he will and will not obey in the New Testament Scriptures. In this same passage, in verse 2, Paul commended the Corinthian church for keeping the ordinances he had delivered to them. It makes no sense for him to say now that they are at liberty to disagree with the things he is teaching. In 1 Corinthians 14:37 he tells them that the things he was writing to them are the commandments of the Lord. The things Paul wrote in His epistles are for all churches of every century. Second, verse 16 is saying that if any person is contentious about these matters and claims that it is proper for a woman to have authority over men or to wear her hair short like a man, such an one should consider the custom of the churches. It was customary in all of the churches for women to assume a position of submission to the man and to wear their hair long as a symbol of their submission. Thus Paul concluded this subject by strengthening his argument in pointing to general custom among the apostles and churches.

Well there you have it ;-)

Chris
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8541689


You ask a simple question..and get the whole fucking BIBLE thrown at you in response.

Its no wonder no one has time for christians these days.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 15440689


whatever
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8541689





All im saying is..keep the answers short and simple.

No one has time to read all that.

So many people DO have questions but never get any answers because christians seem to think people have all the time in the world to read endless walls of text and pages and pages from years and years of neverending doctrinal debates.

No one has time for that crap.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 15063094
United States
05/02/2012 09:07 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
jesus was a mushroom
 Quoting: nocty
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 15412720
United States
05/02/2012 09:10 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
double post, servers are slow
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 15412720
United States
05/02/2012 09:10 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
many of the writers of the NT were still very confused. and then add mistranslation and out and out changing of text and you have a very unreliable book of cosmology and God. ditto the OT too
nocty

User ID: 3965385
United States
05/02/2012 09:28 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
jesus was a mushroom
 Quoting: nocty


bsflag
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8541689






what are all these mushrooms doing in famous cathedrals and churches?

you are like little children ,so gullible and ready to suck satans cock at any time for what ever they write you believe.
Lancelot

User ID: 1510388
Canada
05/02/2012 09:34 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
I am so sick and tired of someone like you who does not even know how to spell simple words and has no clue regarding grammar. Shame on you! You give other religious freaks a bad name!

This is a wakeup call - learn proper English - or be left behind!
nocty

User ID: 3965385
United States
05/02/2012 09:35 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
they are all religous freaks,except the ones that accepted jesus crhist as their savior,like me :)

Last Edited by nocty on 05/02/2012 09:36 PM
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 14969166
Australia
05/02/2012 09:38 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
they are all religous freaks,except the ones that accepted jesus crhist as their savior,like me :)
 Quoting: nocty


So you are just a FREAK then..and not religious?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1169966
United States
05/02/2012 09:42 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
<< 1 Corinthians 11:6 >>

New International Version
If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8541689


LOL==simply stating the need for veiling,put a scarf,hat whatever in the House of the Lord and basically when in public
and to dress modestly not like the shyte worn freely today in our streets.

burqa is simply covering up with loose fitting garments and covering your head/neck with a scarf--common among all traditionalists--looking like nuns or strict interpretation islamics and their customs as those from bosnia,albania etc never wear that or even bother to cover their heads.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 15436242
United States
05/02/2012 09:43 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
There was and is a very good and sound reason for the "Burkha". Too bad no one will tell you numbskulls what that is but I will.

The fallen angels found human women to be appealing and so they had sex with them. The "Burkha" were to be worn so as to not make the human women attractive to the fallen angels.

.
humbird

User ID: 15423628
United States
05/02/2012 09:43 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Jesus said "Women who doesn't cover their heads Should be force to shave their Heads". Was Jesus recommending "Burkha" ?
Paul sucks. As soon as I read that stupid opinion, I figured it was the FAKE aPOSTLE pAUL. He was maybe a butt bandit. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Aside from the small band of Forteans scattered around the world, nobody seems to notice all aspects of this phantasmagoria.(John A. Keel)

News