Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 98

Thread: What hat do you wear?

  1. #26

  2. #27
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Killing time on phone.
    Will post more later but above is an interesting article, I got a chance to skim it and in a few places i do agree with it...
    Last edited by alanmolstad; 01-07-2015 at 04:27 PM.

  3. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Halifax Nova Scotia
    Posts
    695

    Default

    Read the first response under the article and then go to the first line where the article author comments on Henry's response; "Henry, I think you totally got it. Spot on." When all is said and done they are saying the same as I have been saying.
    Be ready to pray, preach or die at a moments notice

  4. #29
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    If you have a question concerning anything I have written and posted on the forum, just let me know and I will be happy to have a 2nd look and take another shot at it.

  5. #30
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    any question at all....

  6. #31
    Senior Member MichaellS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Notre Dame, IN
    Posts
    422

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alanmolstad View Post
    , , above is an interesting article, I got a chance to skim it and in a few places i do agree with it...
    What is it of this lady theologian's approach you don't agree with? Can you cite any other theologians who also share your position? From your perspective Alan, is this just a simple case of spiritual reason edging over the the bulk of conventional treatment here?

  7. #32
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    I just skimmed it one time as i waited for my wife to get done in the store...
    I have no idea what this or that theologian is into...
    If i remember correctly, I did a GOOGLE search for this topic on my phone and I think the link I posted was the 3rd or 4th hit .

    I skimmed each of the things I looked at, and (again if I remember correctly) I noticed that a lot of the things I was reading were connected to the same "veil"understanding that i have run into many times before.

    I think that the reason I posted the link was due to one or two lines I read that had some reference to the whole "veil" connection.

    I dont know if I was in any personal agreement at all with what the link had to say?, (I rather doubt it, buts it's possible) but I felt that it might be something that a reader on this topic might find entertaining....



    Now, once again, I have written a great deal on this topic, and it's about all I know on it too by the way

    So if there is ANYTHING that I have written that you have a question about?, or would like me to go over something I said that I did not explain well enough? Just let me know and I would be happy to take another shot at it.
    Last edited by alanmolstad; 01-08-2015 at 10:00 PM.

  8. #33
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MichaellS View Post
    From your perspective Alan, is this just a simple case of spiritual reason edging over the the bulk of conventional treatment here?
    well....Im not sure what you are asking about, but I can say this -

    That when any of us lift a verse out of context we can use it to prove about anything we want to.
    The verse I talked about in Genesis is one such situation where a commonly heard understanding has to rely of people opening their bible to only that one page,and only reading that one or two verses.

    The other thing I talked about dealing with the head "covering" is also something that relies on people going at the verse with a predetermined finish line in mind.
    When they read the verse and get to the word "covering" their mind will replace that word with another that fits better into their whole predetermined understanding of what the Bible is, (or should be) teaching there....regardless of what it says in black and white.



    Let me give you yet another example of how people replace one word that appears in the Bible with another that they feel fits their theology better.
    QUESTION: What does the Bible say was made first "In the beginning"?


    I asked that question many times to my Young Earth teachers, and they all answered "The Light"
    I tried many times to get them to open their Bible and read what it says in Genesis, but even if they did read what the bible says in black and white,they refused to believe it because it simply disagreed with what they had predetermined to be what "is", ( or in their minds "should be") taught in Genesis about the order of creation.


    By the way, the Bible teaches us that the first thing that God created in the beginning was the Heavens and the earth....




    People seem to want to try to use the verse that talks about a "covering" for different reasons.
    All I'm saying is that the clear and simplest reading of the verse will lead you to the clear and simple conclusion that here Paul was just talking about hair styles.

    Paul was just attempting to save his church brothers and sisters from running afoul of customs and traditions.
    Paul wanted the church to not get a bad reputation, and so was attempting to have people conform to the widely held traditions at the time concerning hair length and it's context in the society.

    Now, along the way we will read about a lot of things that are tossed into the mix.
    EXAMPLE:, the part of the verse that talks about a girl getting her head shaved.
    People seek a way to understand this verse and so they bring in lots and lots of stories about hookers, and adultery, and all sorts of stuff that really have ZERO to do with what Paul wanted to talk to us abut here.

    I'm just saying that there is no need to dump all that junk into the story as its just going to screw people up and get them mixed up as to what Paul was talking about.

    The simple fact of life is, that to shave your head is the same thing as to cut the hair....it's just a tighter cut.
    perhaps performed with different tools, BUT ITS THE SAME IDEA!!!


    I shave every day myself, and the difference between shaving some hair and cutting some hair depends on the hair length you are dealing with and/or results you are seeking to get.

    There is no need to drag the story of a hooker or adultery into it, and if you did you would confuse the point.

    Once again, shaving and getting a hair cut are the same thing.....sorta, more or less.

    Remember Paul himself is said to have shaved all the hair off his head one time.

    Im told that when girls do the same type of vow to the Lord that Paul undertook, that they too would shave off all the hair as a sign of their serious commitment to their vows.
    No need to drag a story of a hooker into understanding why Paul shaved his head, and if you were to do so it would just mess up the point of the story anyway.

    Notice also that right after Paul talks about a girl shaving her head he backs-away from that idea and points out that if a girl with a shaved head is seen as a disgrace that she should wear it longer then.

    once again this is clearly Paul attempting to save his sisters from adopting a hair style that might be seen as disgraceful in that society.



    And that's the whole context of what Paul is aiming to achieve here.
    Last edited by alanmolstad; 01-08-2015 at 10:33 PM.

  9. #34
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Now as you know, I always try to wrap up what I have said on a topic with the invitation for anyone with a question about what i have written to come forth and ask me to go over something a 2nd time that was unclear.

    I also see by the lack of guests right now on this message board that it kinda seems like except for myself no one else is posting as of late?
    I dont mind that , (as you can clearly tell..LOL) but it does kinda make it seem like Im posting all the time day and night, when in reality its just once in a while on a wide variety of topics.

    Be that as it may, because it does appear that Im posting a lot of stuff here I should also make it very clear to other guests that I invite you to go over anything I have written here on this forum, and if there is ANYTHING I have said that you want me to readdress?...just ask me to do so!

    I would be more than happy to take another shot at a question or topic that you think I need taking a 2nd look at, or need to re-write to make more clear.


    So regardless of the topic or how long ago i may have written something, if you see something odd, ask me to look at it again.

  10. #35
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Halifax Nova Scotia
    Posts
    695

    Default

    1 Corinthians 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.
    1 Corinthians 11:4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.
    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.
    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.

    If this is just about hair cutting, why is verse 3 so careful about identifying exactly what the heads are that need to be uncovered and those that need to be covered?
    Be ready to pray, preach or die at a moments notice

  11. #36
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Saxon View Post
    1 Corinthians 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.
    1 Corinthians 11:4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.
    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.
    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.

    If this is just about hair cutting, why is verse 3 so careful about identifying exactly what the heads are that need to be uncovered and those that need to be covered?
    long hair is given to the girl as her "covering" so that her head is covered and thereby it is a good reflection on her husband.

    For when you look at her covering on her head you see the respect she has for her husband.

    Thus the connection between her husband and what her own head looks like with its hair covering.
    Looking at one you are looking at the other.....thats how connected this matter was to these people...."inseparable"


    Thus there is no confusion as to why the covering is important to Paul, and why Paul is talking to his church abut this matter.

    Yes all Paul is doing is offering advice that might be called "parental" in that this is just talking about girl's hair styles and their context.

    Yet this is a fact of life that people will judge you on this matter in their culture and so its best for everyone to be on the same page and understand that its not just your husband (the girl's head) that is dishonored but also the whole Christian faith in general too.

    That is the reason Paul lists the other churches when he talks about this tradition.
    |Paul was dropping the hint that this matter with the Corinthian church is being watched closely by the all other churches ...
    Last edited by alanmolstad; 01-10-2015 at 12:10 AM.

  12. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Halifax Nova Scotia
    Posts
    695

    Default

    Just how does this answer the question? What does a woman's hair have to do with covering her husband? What does a man's hair have to do with not covering Christ?

    If this is just about hair cutting, why is verse 3 so careful about identifying exactly what the heads are that need to be uncovered and those that need to be covered?
    Be ready to pray, preach or die at a moments notice

  13. #38
    Senior Member MichaellS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Notre Dame, IN
    Posts
    422

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Saxon View Post
    Just how does this answer the question? What does a woman's hair have to do with covering her husband? What does a man's hair have to do with not covering Christ?

    If this is just about hair cutting, why is verse 3 so careful about identifying exactly what the heads are that need to be uncovered and those that need to be covered?
    Hello Saxon, nice to meet you.

    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:

    “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.”
    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.

  14. #39
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Saxon View Post
    Just how does this answer the question? What does a woman's hair have to do with covering her husband?

    Here is my answer to your question:

    I am an American.
    As such whenever I hear someone talking about 9/11 I have a mental image of what they are talking about.....(The twin towers falling)
    So strong is the connection in my mind between the numbers "9/11" that the moment I hear them I automatically think of the Towers.

    So to me, the numbers "9/11" mean the same thing as the attack on the Twin Towers....
    The two totally different ideas ( one just a set or numbers and the other a terrorist attack) are now permanently merged in my mind to be talking about the same single thing.



    or.....


    The image of the flag being raised at the top of a hill on an island in the South Pacific during World War Two.

    When you think of that flag what does it mean to you?

    To me the flag means our victorious fighting men...it means "America" to me.

    But the flag is not a man....the flag is just a bunch of colored cloth, and its not a whole country.
    yet to my mind the sight of the flag being raised over that battlefield is permanently connected to the idea of our victory, our country.



    So......in the same way we now return to our topic here dealing with Paul's teachings on the importance of maintaining proper hair styles in their culture given the context that such hair styles may carry.

    Long hair on a girl was seen in their culture as being respectful to the man that was her authority...(her husband or father)
    The length of the hair was seen as a sign of a girl's uprightness and respect.

    So in other words, just as looking at the flag or hearing the numbers 9/11 are permanently connected to other things that they immediately bring to mind, so to would looking at the length of a girl's hair bring to mind her respect to her husband.

    The girl's "Hair" and her "husband" are connected...they are the same "thing" in that they are inseparable.

    And "that" is why the Bible tells us too that girls should always "cover" their head, as in doing so it will show the world that they are displaying proper respect to their husbands.


    Now that is the thrust of Paul's traditional understanding we get on the girl's side, and it's the same concept when dealing with the boy's too!

    Shorter hair was the traditional way boy's kept their hair cut.
    Shorter hair was a sign that a boy was not attempting to look like a girl, and that was seen as showing respect for the differences between man and women.
    And the differences were important because of the idea that the differences are because GOD designed us to be different!

    This is why Paul was saying that when a man prayed with his head 'covered" (and remember we already learned that the "covering" was long hair) that this would be seen as showing disrespect to god , for the man was going against God's design for men and women to be different......for the differences were by God's design.


    That is why by looking at the length of a man's hair you saw his respect for the lord.
    Hair length and his respect for god were the same thing...they had become inseparable!



    This is why Paul used the argument that a "man" is the "head" of the women....for looking at her head was the same as looking at her husband....her head and her husband are the same thing, the two totally different things had merged into the same idea....the same thing.


    And....therefore...
    Paul then also says that the "head" of the man is Christ"
    its the same arguement that paul makes use of when dealing with the girls, in that when you look at the hair on the head of the man you see the man's respect for Jesus.
    The hair on his head, is the same as his respect for Christ....so Christ is his head in that the two different things are now merged into the same idea...the same 'thing'


    This is why the head of Christ also is God.....for the two things are merged into the same idea...the same thing.
    When you look at Christ and you remember his death that the father sent him into the world to die, then you cant help but think of the Lord God when you look at Christ....

    Looking at one points to the other....
    Last edited by alanmolstad; 01-10-2015 at 10:40 AM.

  15. #40
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MichaellS View Post

    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.
    Mike, I was with you until I got to this last sentence....then i lost your meaning and Im not sure what you are asking me?

    I dont understand the 'natural or spiritual honor/dishonor" part of your question......





    and.
    When i point out that Paul is not going over something that Jesus said, its just how it is.
    Paul is not quoting Jesus in his argument.
    Paul does not quote other Disciples too.

    But Paul does build his argument on some very sound principles that are based on Scripture.

    Yet, at the end of this section when Paul is wrapping up his argument he does not close with some sort of Commandment or quotation.
    What Paul finally falls back on is the fact that what he is saying is also what all the other churches under his authority practice.

    This is why I always try to point out that because this is not something that the Lord taught on during his life, we cant hold it to be so critical as it would be equal with a teaching like the "resurrection" or the "trinity" or "Salvation"


    Its a side-issue that Paul felt the need to preach on, and considering the trouble this same church had gotten into over the question of the Gifts of the Spirit and Speaking in Tongues, i can easily believe that things had gotten out of hand on this question of how the hair styles on sisters within that church were bringing condemnation down on them from all quarters.

    I believe that the reason Paul felt the need to spend so much time on this one topic was a clear sign that "S__t had hit the fan"
    Last edited by alanmolstad; 01-10-2015 at 11:18 AM.

  16. #41
    Senior Member MichaellS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Notre Dame, IN
    Posts
    422

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alanmolstad View Post
    Mike, I was with you until I got to this last sentence....then i lost your meaning and Im not sure what you are asking me?

    I dont understand the 'natural or spiritual honor/dishonor" part of your question......





    and.
    When i point out that Paul is not going over something that Jesus said, its just how it is.
    Paul is not quoting Jesus in his argument.
    Paul does not quote other Disciples too.

    But Paul does build his argument on some very sound principles that are based on Scripture.

    Yet, at the end of this section when Paul is wrapping up his argument he does not close with some sort of Commandment or quotation.
    What Paul does fall back on is the fact that what he is saying is also what all the other churches under his authority practice.

    This is why I always try to point out that because this is not something that the Lord taught on during his life, we cant hold it to be so critical as it would be equal with a teaching like the "resurrection" or the "trinity" or "Salvation"


    Its a side-issue that Paul felt the need to preach on, and considering the trouble this same church had gotten into over the question of the Gifts of the Spirit and Speaking in Tongues, i can easily believe that things had gotten out of hand on this question of how the hair styles on sisters within that church were bringing condemnation down on them from all quarters.

    I believe that the reason Paul felt the need to spend so much time on this one topic was a clear sign that "S__t had hit the fan"
    Sure Alan, referring back to the second paragraph, yours is more of a “gender treatment of love and honor”, thereby “natural”. And you have made it in the simplest terms as something that was “clear” coming from Paul.

    Whereas Saxon is attempting to tell us the covering or not is directly connected to one’s honoring Christ or not, thereby “spiritual”. And he probably wants the references shown there of that connection to be his point of being clear.

    If I misjudged everything you have said with this ***ertion, my apologies. He may want to correct me as well. I still don’t feel I am seeing as clearly as I would hope on this. That may be due to the lack of countering verse for verse. Frankly, I don’t see that feasible here. But I’ll re-read yours and may change, and if I’m not mistaken, there are additional considerations in that last comment of yours.

  17. #42
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MichaellS View Post
    . But I’ll re-read yours and may change, and if I’m not mistaken, there are additional considerations in that last comment of yours.
    Im still re-editing it!

    Funny how when i write something one way, and then a bit later come back and read it again i find that it does not flow the way i want...)(*&(*&%*$&$#%$#&

  18. #43
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Halifax Nova Scotia
    Posts
    695

    Default

    Hello Saxon, nice to meet you.
    Nice to meet you too Mike.



    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.



    “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.



    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.
    Be ready to pray, preach or die at a moments notice

  19. #44
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Halifax Nova Scotia
    Posts
    695

    Default

    Here is my answer to your question:

    I am an American.
    As such whenever I hear someone talking about 9/11 I have a mental image of what they are talking about.....(The twin towers falling)
    So strong is the connection in my mind between the numbers "9/11" that the moment I hear them I automatically think of the Towers.

    So to me, the numbers "9/11" mean the same thing as the attack on the Twin Towers....
    The two totally different ideas ( one just a set or numbers and the other a terrorist attack) are now permanently merged in my mind to be talking about the same single thing.
    Before the destruction of the towers 9/11 was simply a date and then in many countries 911 became the universal emergency phone number. To come up with what is the quickest thing to your memory is CONTEXT.

    What I believe about the covering of the heads in 1Corinthians 11:3 is that the context is not hair styles but respect to the heads as set out in 1Corinthians 11:3.

    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.
    Be ready to pray, preach or die at a moments notice

  20. #45
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    see, I dont believe that the verses are dealing with "hats" in even the slightest way.....

    I dont see any listed, I dont see a hint about them dropped, I dont see them as being involved with this at all.

    All I see is a very clear and simple definition given that a girls long hair was given to her as a covering.....

  21. #46
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Halifax Nova Scotia
    Posts
    695

    Default

    Then deal with the comments on hair. Your avoidance is so obvious.

    In 1 Corinthians 11:6 this is a statement of a woman being uncovered. This is not speaking of the heads that were mentioned in 1 Corinthians 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 1 Corinthians 11:3.

    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.

    1 Corinthians 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.
    Be ready to pray, preach or die at a moments notice

  22. #47
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Saxon View Post
    Then deal with the comments on hair. Your avoidance is so obvious.

    In 1 Corinthians 11:6 this is a statement of a woman being uncovered. This is not speaking of the heads that were mentioned in 1 Corinthians 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 1 Corinthians 11:3.

    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.

    1 Corinthians 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.
    its not talking about any hats....
    Not at all...

    Not even in the slightest way...

    The Bible is very clear what this 'covering" is that a girl is to have..."Long hair"


    If you simply read the whole set of verses in question with the understanding that the word "covering" or "covered" is just taking about the girl's "long hair" there is no need to add the idea of a "hat" or a veil, or a baseball cap, or a bike helmet to the text.....


    "long hair" works fine, and its the only thing Paul wanted us to be thinking about.

  23. #48
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Paul then talks about that if a girl has her head uncovered, (and remember we already know that the girl's covering is her "long hair" so this is talking about a girl that has cut her hair very short) that she should shave her head.

    Some people try to take this as a snide remark by Paul.
    Some people claim that Paul here is p***ing down a sentence onto the girls, as if he has judged them and now has the power to sentence them to something...
    Some people are saying Paul wants us to force a girl with short hair to look like she has committed adultery, or was like a pros***ute
    ,
    But that is WRONG!

    That whole line of thinking is based on poor scholarship!

    Such teachings that we sometimes hear from Christian Bible teachers run counter to what Paul was clearly attempting to do....
    for Paul is attempting to help girls "IMPROVE" the way they appear to the general society...

    Paul is not joking around about making our church sisters and daughters look like hookers!

    That is clearly not what Paul wants at all...Paul is not for one moment saying, "Make them look like pros***utes!"

    After all Paul knew that girls sometimes shave their heads when they perform the same vow that Paul also undertook.
    Thats why he brings it up here!
    Paul knew about this from personal experience!


    So when Paul suggests that girls shave their heads, he is simply talking about the socially acceptable context that a girl is allowed to wear short hair....

    But then Paul also backs-away from even his suggestion when he warns that if where you live it is disrespectful for a girl to have a shaved head then she should just wear her hair long and be "covered"

    At all times Paul is attempting to help girls present themselves as being pure and respectful, so that they do not bring shame down on themselves and thereby the church too.
    Last edited by alanmolstad; 01-12-2015 at 03:32 PM.

  24. #49
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Remember, if after reading the above post, or any of the comments i have written on this topic you see an issue?., please feel free to ask me to address what i have written that is unclear...

  25. #50
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    No more issues?
    All wrapped up here with this topic?

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •