Covering of your head!!!

[David777]

Hello all.

Dannibear said,

My God is a loving God and a fair and just God.
If someone were to ever tell me I were sinning
because I didn't wear a hat to church, then I would
think that were legalism.

Dannibear is right on this point.

What is the priority for any Christian.

2 Corinthians 11:3

...your minds should be led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ.

Philippians 3:14

I press toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus.


In a modern society, females do not wear hats.


It would be legalism to force the issue.


It is not an issue and cannot ever be.


Our goal is love from a pure heart.


Love accepts no matter what the cost.

 

[strawberry]

Where in the Old Testament is it stated ?

Looks like this is an old thread that was recently resurrected, so I'll help out with your question and I'll also expound.

Old covenant:

Old Testament
Head covering for women: Genesis 24:65, Numbers 5:18 and Isaiah 47:2.
Both the men and the women of the Old Covenant covered their heads in the Temple.

Leviticus 10:6:

And Moses said to Aaron, and to Eleazar and Ithamar, his sons, “Do not uncover your heads nor tear your clothes, lest you die, and wrath come upon all the people. But let your brethren, the whole house of Israel, bewail the burning which the Lord has kindled.
​

New Testament
Only women should cover their heads was preached by the Apostle of the Gentiles.

1 Corinthians 11:5-6 KJV:

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.
​

The simple answer is that head covering was under the old covenant. Remember, the blood of Jesus fulfilled the old covenant when he was crucified.

Gal 3:25-29 KJV:

25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. (the law is called the schoolmaster)

26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.

27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

​

What we find in the new covenant is equality. (See Galatians 3:28 above.)

 

[WantToKnowHim]

Good day...

I am not sure about this, but Apostle Paul once quoted that for him it is a disgrace not to cover one's head in women..however , he said that it was not really a law but merely a custom of the church.

1 Corinthians 11:16

When I read this passage, I ought not to cut my hair too short so that somehow my head is covered..However,it is noted that we must not influence others to think that it is wrong not to cover one's hair:


1 Corinthians 8:9-13


Hope this helps..

 

[David777]

Well done strawberry.

I must say that was an impressive post.

Equality is the keyword.

Galatians 3:28
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free,
there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

Thanks Strawberry, the verse above says it all.

Game over.

 

[strawberry]

Where in the Old Testament is it stated ?

Here are a few more Old Testament scriptures:

Ezekiel 24:17 suggests that it was normal for a man to wear his turban while going about bareheaded was a sign of mourning.

To cover one's head in shame:
Leviticus 21:10
Jeremiah 14:3-4
Job 40:13
2 Samuel 15:30
Esther 6:12

In the Old Testament a man normally appeared in public with a cap or turban which did not obscure his face, which is still in practice today in many Middle Eastern countries. He might remove this normal attire and go about bareheaded as a sign of mourning or distress. Contrarily, he might cover his head and face with his mantle or some other kind of garment as a sign of shame and humiliation.

The earliest Biblical reference to a head covering is in Exodus 28:4. It was part of the wardrobe of the High Priest.

 

[strawberry]

David777

I must say that was an impressive post.

Equality is the keyword.

Galatians 3:28
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free,
there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

Thanks Strawberry, the verse above says it all.

Game over.

Howdy!!! I've been away too long! It's very nice to see you again, *hug*. Thank you for the reply. :embarasse

 

[lioncub]

Head Covering

Do we really believe that our Lord would be ashamed of us women if we do not wear a hat?
I personally do not believe that to be so, but that is my own personal opinion. I also have been reading that piece of scripture this week Ricky and this is what I have come to believe myself about it. I think if it were so in all churches a lot of young especially the young may think twice about going perhaps.
Imagine you thinking about this and me also at the same time, is the Lord trying to tell us something?
Godbless

1 Corinthians 11:
5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.
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.

 

[Travis]

I would be tickled pink if any woman I knew sincerely desired to wear a head covering out of respect for the word of God, and from a pure heart filled with meekness and humility.

I would have quite the opposite reaction to someone trying to enforce the wearing of a head covering upon a woman, or a woman wearing a head covering and trying to make others conform to her own personal convictions regarding such, in order to be like her.

I have to admit, I don't fully understand the text at hand.

Blessings!

Travis

 

[leanne kennelly]

Just wanted to give my personal testimony here about covering. Over the last few years, when I would pray, I would get the feeling that I was supposed to cover my head. I would grab a scarf or towel, or whatever was laying around at the time, and put it on my head.

I studied 1 Corinthians 11, and I researched it.....the Greek word for covering is not hair-it means an actual veil. I laid in bed a couple of months ago, and prayed about it-I told God that if the covering was still for today, and He wanted me to do it, I would.

Immedietely, the Holy Spirit fell on me and I was filled with the most incredible peace and joy....it was the clearest "yes!" that I could have gotten! I threw a scarf on my head and have been covering full time ever since! For an entire week, I felt the Lord's presence and it was like I had just gotten saved-I had a strong joy and happiness in my salvation!

As for the thing about the covering being cultural....well, verse 10 says that the woman should have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. The angels are always going to be there, no matter what century we are living in, and no matter what area of the world. Plus, God does not change-He is the same yesterday, today, and always....He gave us the commandments in the Bible to last always, yet man is the one who wants to change things and say it is because "times are changing".

God's word does not change.....a woman still should have a covering, at least when praying. I want to be ready to pray at any time, so I cover constantly.

I have read testimonies about a woman who was tormented by horrible blasphemous thoughts, constantly. She started covering, and the thoughts stopped. Another pastor who had a wife who covered during the day, started having nightmares every night. He told his wife to cover at night, just to see what would happen. Immedietely the nightmares stopped. The same thing happened to a friend of his, and he told him to tell his wife to cover at night, and when she did, his nightmares went away. A piece of cloth on a woman's head is not some magic thing, but it does show that a woman is obeying the spiritual order of God.

The order is that God is first, then Christ, then the man, then the woman. It does not matter about "women's rights" or "equality with men" or whatever....it is God's will that man was created first, and then woman.

But today, the roles have almost been reversed.....many woman want a man's job because they want to be "equal" with man on every level. Many men wear their hair long, and women cut their hair very short. Jeans are very popular for women, of course, even though God said that anyone who wears the clothing of the opposite sex is an abomination (Deuteronomy 22:5).....but it's so easy to say that "times are changing".

But God's word does not change....He wants a man to look and dress like a man, and a woman to look and dress like a woman. Women covered up until less than 100 years ago....and it was man who said it was "not for today"....God never said that at all. The covering is an outward symbol of submission and modesty....

I'm not that good at explaining it, but all I know is that because of how God answered my prayer, and my convictions of 1 Corinthians 11, as well as the same convictions of other Christian women all over the world, I believe that women should cover their hair. I have a lot of really good websites that explain the covering really well-a lot better than I can, if anyone is interested-or you can just google "Christian headcovering" and find lots of good sites as well-some really good videos on YouTube as well. Sorry-this was meant to be a simple testimony.

I had a strong conviction when a new christian over 30 years ago about a womans head being covered and it has remained despite several occasions where it caused bitter debate. I then had fellowship with what is known as the brethren for many years.the free presbyterian church in ireland is also convicted of this. Above all we must obey God when convicted and cannot go back on the light that has been given by God Who is love.

 

[Itz Me]

Hi Maureen, and everyone else interested in this interesting topic!

re: 1 Corinthians 11:3-16

One of the key phrases in this passage is found in verse 10, that is, that in those days the head covering was a sign of authority. We no longer have this as part of our culture, but we do have other symbols of "authority." For instance as a married women I wear a wedding ring and I use my husband's last name as my own. These are definite symbols of authority that are recognised by our society and therefore are valid. So the principle here is of submission to your husband if you are married. The covering of the husband provides spiritual protection.

(In those days the social structure was so that people rarely lived alone, so a women either belonged to her father's family or her husband's, when she was married.)

This passage is warning wives against usurping the position of her husband. She may pray and prophecy, but in a gracious manner, not in a dominating, bossy way, that demeans or humiliates her husband.

The Greek words in this passage usually translated as woman and man, are more correctly translated as husband and wife! This is also clearly understood from verse 3...it is my husband who is my head...not just any man.

The freedoms and improved status that the women had in the early Church were new and exciting (Acts 2:17-18;Galatians 3:28) and it seems that some women sometimes went overboard, so Paul is just reminding them of their position and encouraging them to be better behaved.

As Paul says in verse 13: "judge for youselves."

Also Ricky's point about prostitutes having a shaved head is very valid. They have no male covering and therefore no symbol of it.

The head covering was just a symbol, a symbol that is no longer recognised in our society and therefore no longer valid. The principle of submission however remains!

I hope this helps

love
evangeline

Hi! 'Evangeline'
Thank you for this very discerning synopsis of the matter. MUCH appreciated.

 

[Ophel]

what opinions do you have of women having to have their head covered in church?
I have just recently started attended my Dad's church because he goes alone but because it is Brethren belief they say the women must wear a hat or something on their head.
Personally I can't agree I know it does state it in the Bible but it is Old Testament belief, and I really don't like hats
Anyone got any comments on this?

I haven't read the thread yet, but this idea that women must wear a head covering is a cultural issue and not a spiritual one. For me, for an unbeliever coming into the local church that practices this tradition, it would serve as a hindrance to them receiving Jesus Christ and the freedom He offers, especially freedom from religion. It is a difficult thing for a local church to be relevant to people when they are following after a 2000-year-old cultural tradition.

 

[Ophel]

Thank you

Chad and Jinks
I know were your coming from Jinks it has a lot of pointers, there have been a numerous amount of changes in modern worship, like for example I watch the God Channel now and then, and I watched in amazement the other night at a Rock Mission were all the congration were jumping up and down in song and I just wondered if Jesus were to look down on them just what would be his thoughts, perhaps I'm being old fashioned, but it just seemed very weird to me to praise the Lord in such a mannor.

Believe me, God is loving such worship. He is not loving the Michal-type criticisms of it, also.

If one can jump and shout at a football game, then one can jump and shout to God with even more adoration and abandon.

 

[Travis]

Hi Maureen, and everyone else interested in this interesting topic!

re: 1 Corinthians 11:3-16

One of the key phrases in this passage is found in verse 10, that is, that in those days the head covering was a sign of authority. We no longer have this as part of our culture, but we do have other symbols of "authority." For instance as a married women I wear a wedding ring and I use my husband's last name as my own. These are definite symbols of authority that are recognised by our society and therefore are valid. So the principle here is of submission to your husband if you are married. The covering of the husband provides spiritual protection.

(In those days the social structure was so that people rarely lived alone, so a women either belonged to her father's family or her husband's, when she was married.)

This passage is warning wives against usurping the position of her husband. She may pray and prophecy, but in a gracious manner, not in a dominating, bossy way, that demeans or humiliates her husband.

The Greek words in this passage usually translated as woman and man, are more correctly translated as husband and wife! This is also clearly understood from verse 3...it is my husband who is my head...not just any man.

The freedoms and improved status that the women had in the early Church were new and exciting (Acts 2:17-18;Galatians 3:28) and it seems that some women sometimes went overboard, so Paul is just reminding them of their position and encouraging them to be better behaved.

As Paul says in verse 13: "judge for youselves."

Also Ricky's point about prostitutes having a shaved head is very valid. They have no male covering and therefore no symbol of it.

The head covering was just a symbol, a symbol that is no longer recognised in our society and therefore no longer valid. The principle of submission however remains!

I hope this helps

love
evangeline

I already admitted that I don't fully understand this controversial topic. That being said, I don't think the above comment does the text justice, however nice and reasonable it may sound. I think that instead it glosses over the truth, perhaps due to the inconvenience or assumed irrationality of such (the truth that is).

When the word doesn't quite make sense to our human minds, we often resort to shredding it to pieces and transforming it to fit our mold instead. This never works out well for anyone in the end.

There were 1000's of topics Paul and others could have addressed in their various epistles, which the Lord did not see fit to be a part of the New Testament cannon. The fact that this topic is addressed at all should indicate to us there is something of import there, whatever it may be. The word of God is not bound to customs of men and cultural limitations. Though these play a role in understanding such, we shouldn't dismiss things outright just because our culture is different today. The Lord never changes, even when our cultures do. Perhaps then the problem lies in our culture and its customs? Perhaps that is why some of these things are so hard for us to understand, because we are swimming in a sea of perversion in this world, and we are so accustomed to it that we don't remember there is any other way of existing.

Any who, I say all that to say this. We shouldn't explain away the word of God so quickly when we don't seem to understand it.

Blessings,

Travis

 

[Ophel]

Head coverings were Paul's logical prescription for a particular church at that particular time in history, for a particular difficulty in behaviour.

We don't cover our heads anywhere in this culture for any reason apart from weather. It is a cultural behaviour that the middle eastern people adhere to. Paul was addressing the fact that the newly Christian women were coming into the churches with bare, bald heads, bearing the outward look of their pagan pasts. Baldness was found in those who were priestesses in the cult of Aphrodite. Paul wanted them to cover up their remnant look and be modest and uniform, dressing as other women of the day. Nothing wrong with that.

Today, we would stick out like a sore thumb coming into the Lord's house veiled. How welcoming would that be to visitors? It isn't the uniform dress of women today, and to adhere to an ancient custom of dress as some sort of religious and pious behaviour is legalism and serves to hold the unchurched at arm's length, rather than endear us to them.

 

[Travis]

Head coverings were Paul's logical prescription for a particular church at that particular time in history, for a particular difficulty in behaviour.

We don't cover our heads anywhere in this culture for any reason apart from weather. It is a cultural behaviour that the middle eastern people adhere to. Paul was addressing the fact that the newly Christian women were coming into the churches with bare, bald heads, bearing the outward look of their pagan pasts. Baldness was found in those who were priestesses in the cult of Aphrodite. Paul wanted them to cover up their remnant look and be modest and uniform, dressing as other women of the day. Nothing wrong with that.

Today, we would stick out like a sore thumb coming into the Lord's house veiled. How welcoming would that be to visitors? It isn't the uniform dress of women today, and to adhere to an ancient custom of dress as some sort of religious and pious behaviour is legalism and serves to hold the unchurched at arm's length, rather than endear us to them.

I already admitted that I don't fully understand this controversial topic. That being said, I don't think the above comment does the text justice, however nice and reasonable it may sound. I think that instead it glosses over the truth, perhaps due to the inconvenience or assumed irrationality of such (the truth that is).

When the word doesn't quite make sense to our human minds, we often resort to shredding it to pieces and transforming it to fit our mold instead. This never works out well for anyone in the end.

There were 1000's of topics Paul and others could have addressed in their various epistles, which the Lord did not see fit to be a part of the New Testament cannon. The fact that this topic is addressed at all should indicate to us there is something of import there, whatever it may be. The word of God is not bound to customs of men and cultural limitations. Though these play a role in understanding such, we shouldn't dismiss things outright just because our culture is different today. The Lord never changes, even when our cultures do. Perhaps then the problem lies in our culture and its customs? Perhaps that is why some of these things are so hard for us to understand, because we are swimming in a sea of perversion in this world, and we are so accustomed to it that we don't remember there is any other way of existing.

Any who, I say all that to say this. We shouldn't explain away the word of God so quickly when we don't seem to understand it.

Blessings,

Travis

 

[Ophel]

I already admitted that I don't fully understand this controversial topic. That being said, I don't think the above comment does the text justice, however nice and reasonable it may sound. I think that instead it glosses over the truth, perhaps due to the inconvenience or assumed irrationality of such (the truth that is).

When the word doesn't quite make sense to our human minds, we often resort to shredding it to pieces and transforming it to fit our mold instead. This never works out well for anyone in the end.

There were 1000's of topics Paul and others could have addressed in their various epistles, which the Lord did not see fit to be a part of the New Testament cannon. The fact that this topic is addressed at all should indicate to us there is something of import there, whatever it may be. The word of God is not bound to customs of men and cultural limitations. Though these play a role in understanding such, we shouldn't dismiss things outright just because our culture is different today. The Lord never changes, even when our cultures do. Perhaps then the problem lies in our culture and its customs? Perhaps that is why some of these things are so hard for us to understand, because we are swimming in a sea of perversion in this world, and we are so accustomed to it that we don't remember there is any other way of existing.

Any who, I say all that to say this. We shouldn't explain away the word of God so quickly when we don't seem to understand it.

Blessings,

Travis

Actually, no one really knows the meaning of the text concerning "because of the angels". However, all things point to the fact that Paul was speaking to a cultural issue.

Women who wear a head covering don't need someone to criticize them. I pray for them that they find their freedom in Christ. He doesn't call them to do it. Religion does. It doesn't mean that they love the Saviour any less. It is their act of reverence.

However, some are doing it out of submission to a male's interpretation of Paul's letters to the churches under his care. I trust that as people become more filled with the knowledge of God and with the Holy Spirit, He will speak to them about it. In the meantime, let us worship Jesus Christ with abandon! Hopefully the covering will fall off! :laugh:

The only thing I want on my head is the hand of Jesus blessing me.

 

[Thiscrosshurts]

Galatians 3:27 For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.
Galatians 3: 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

In the flesh there are Men and Women.
Those Clothed with Christ are the children of God.
John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
This verse is from the KJV,other translations use children.(perhaps not to exclude women?).
God made Man,Male and female he made them but they are both variations of Man
We are to be a Kingdom of Kings and Priests.

If people refuse to embrace the new role they have been given then they are going
to need a few rules to keep them alive long enough to seek and find the truth.
Acts 15:19 It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God.

Paul saw that piling rules on the Gentiles was a road back to bondage but in the end he ended up making rules.
Because they were yet carnal.
They never did find that rest from their own works.

Any who, I say all that to say this. We shouldn't explain away the word of God so quickly when we don't seem to understand it.

I agree,there is something to glean or it would not be there.
I think it has symbolic significance just like trimming the beard or having tassels on your garments.
It's seems plausible that it answered something in the flesh that was being caused by spiritual
ignorance or immaturity.