Quote:
Hello Saxon, nice to meet you.
Nice to meet you too Mike.
Quote:
Sometimes I think my head came with a very thick covering, and not with hair, lol. I had a more than usual difficult time trying to get my arms around this.
As much as I tried seeing it as Alan does, as it appears, his more of a gender treatment of love and honor, I think Alan was clear as you know, he doesn’t believe this is concerning the “teachings of Christ” which by far was the biggest hurdle he presented me with. I applaud whatever effort of reasoning he contributes. But back to this not being the teachings of Christ, as I recall, whenever such an occasion came (which was seldom), Paul took the liberty to offer his own personal opinion in the word of God, he plainly told the reader he was about to:
I find that most of the New Testament, as it is written, is not the “teaching of Christ” as if the authors were directly quoting Christ as in the Gospels. It is fairly clear that Jesus is no being quoted in a direct manner but it is also clear all that was written was God breathed. 2 Timothy 3:16 states that all scripture is given by inspiration of God. At the time of the writing, the only scripture was the Old Testament. Eventually the writings of the Apostles was also considered as scripture (See 2 Peter 3:16). I firmly believe that the cannon of scripture is now closed with nothing more to be added.
The Old Testament and Peter’s statement in 2 Peter 3:16 make Alan’s statement about teachings of Christ unreasonable. If we are only to follow the “teachings of Christ”, all that was needed for the Bible would be only what is written in red of a red letter edition.
2 Timothy 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2 Timothy 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
2 Peter 3:16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
Quote:
“But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment." (I Cor 7:6)
But this is what I meant by “conventional treatment” Alan. Academia carries a broad sweeping and fairly unified opinion of this that is in no small amount contrary to your hair only position. But this is where I stop shy of you Saxon, even when I am more inclined to agree with you. As I previously mentioned, to me, I Cor 11:16 indicates people’s convictions will vary on this, and sometimes intensely:
“If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice--nor do the churches of God.”
What we need to find out about 1Corinthians 11:16 is what is this, that, “we have no other practice--nor do the churches of God.” I do believe that it is the cutting of hair and the wearing of “hats” that there is no practice of these supposed rules. In 1Corinthians 11:6 this is a statement of a woman being uncovered. This is not speaking of the heads that were mentioned in 1Corinthians 11:3 so it is a body part. What it seems to be saying is that if a woman doesn’t want to wear a “hat” let her be shorn too. The only caution is “if it be a shame” then she should wear a “hat”. Paul doesn’t care if she has long hair, short hair or no hair, as long as she covers her head, her man/husband. This is totally about respect of the heads as referenced in 1Corinthians 11:3.
1Corinthians 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.
1Corinthians 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.
Quote:
I understand, you and I differ over this one Alan, and against myself, probably a lot more people do than I am aware. But this shouldn’t be. We ought to be of the same mind even in the Church collection of diversity.
Have I ever thought a certain truth was so telling to me there was no way possible for it to be otherwise? Yes, of course. Haven’t you Saxon? Question is, what amount of risk am I willing to subject that revelation to being verifiable or not:
“Where there is no guidance the people fall, But in abundance of counselors there is victory." (Proverbs 11:14)
So if I got this right, it comes down to an opinion of either natural or spiritual honor/dishonor? Correct me if I’m wrong.
Mike.
What I believe is to me always 100% correct. If I didn’t believe that then I have no business believing it. This does not mean that I am 100% correct. We can and do delude ourselves quite easily. We have to have a conviction of belief. We need to take a firm stand because if we don’t stand for anything we will fall for anything.
What we need to keep in mind is that in reality we do not know everything. We also need to know that there are people that we disagree with, but their opinion is just as important as our own. The reason that I press people for clear and precise answers is that I want to know the truth and if it turns out that the truth is not what I currently believe I have to be willing to change my mind. I have to be convinced with confirmation from the Bible. I believe that God will not be as hard on a person who is convinced of a false teaching as he would be with a person who follows the truth because it is the easier thing to do.