Yeah, I think it has to do with Paul's culture. I don't believe it's necessary for all women to cover their heads in church.
2007-08-14 16:29:40
·
answer #1
·
answered by chrstnwrtr 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
First, just because Christ did not teach on the matter doesn't mean that Paul's claims are not valid. Remember, every word of the Bible was inspired by the Holy Spirit (basically the author of the book). You are right that Paul is a Jew but he is also the forefather of Christianity. Paul was the first to spread the gospel to both Jews and Gentiles, and since after the cross the Jewish law is dead, the NT is the modern day source for scriptural guidance. Personally, I would not endorse head coverings in the church for fear of making people feel awkward. However, I do recognize that teaching on head coverings is just as applicable today as any part of the NT and probably should be enforced.
2007-08-14 23:35:10
·
answer #2
·
answered by Jeremy E 2
·
3⤊
0⤋
I think so in some cases. The culture and traditions of those days are reflected in the Scriptures. People need to realize that and look more for the spiritual points being made. At least that is how I approach the Scriptures.
Covering of the head signifies respect and order as well as the culture of that day. For instance, because of the heathen temple practices of women at the pagan temples, Christian women were told to keep their head covered so as not to be associated with the pagan women who shaved their heads or wore their hair short or disheveled (i.e., hanging loose or unkempt).
In Corinth, this was a peculiar and particular application. The unveiled woman was also a prostitute. Some women in the Church were saying "all things are lawful for me, therefore, I won't cover my head." Paul was saying that this should not be done because the veil is a mark of subjection, not to be the man, but to God.
Remember Paul also said (and a lot of Churches seem to forget this verse) that he is not giving a rule to the Churches. He just states what is best in his opinion.
Hope this helps.
2007-08-15 05:51:24
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Some Christians, myself included, agree with you on this. My particular denomination does not have woman pastors (yet), but they do read lessons from the pulpit (not preaching, just the readings), usher, and serve on or lead various boards and such. I am against the majority in my denomination in that I would like to see a female pastor someday -- all she has to do is go through seminary, same as the guys do, and there's no lack of intelligent females in my church.
Those Christians that disagree with you on this will say that Paul was a follower of Jesus, and the Bible is the inspired Word of God (which I do believe), so women should never have a leadership position. I am between a rock and a hard place here myself somewhat, but as you can see from above, I have no problem with female pastors/leaders.
2007-08-14 23:48:54
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
YES I agree simply because Jesus has return, and ever thing has been made anew, or that is in spiritually matters, back to the way GOD has in-tented, yet has not be finalized. Meaning Male, and female as one not separate; Man, and woman, Adam did not become head until They ate the forbidden fruit. Jesus told Mary and Martha go tell the others; this affirms through the grace of GOD all things are possible thru GOD, even women in Ministry. So the story took a backward turn to begin with. The covering of the head I am not sure of.
2007-08-14 23:40:44
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Yes, very much so....Paul was talking to the Corinthian church with a specific problem. The women sitting on a different side of the church and yelling across the room to their husbands. It's ONLY mentioned in Corinthians....He didn't tell all the churches that.....and look at the women leaders....there were lots of them he mentioned in his letters....Pricilla, wife of Aquilla and Lidia, the seller of purple. And more I can't remember.
2007-08-15 01:15:01
·
answer #6
·
answered by Jan P 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
read:
1 Cor 11:16
2 Peter 3:15-18
2 Tim 3:16
2 Peter 1:20-21
2007-08-15 00:31:06
·
answer #7
·
answered by robert p 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
It was not wrong for Paul to state that women cover their heads otherwise God would not have allowed it to be in His Word.
You're right is saying it was not a teaching of Christ. So, if women want to cover their heads and they feel comfortable doing it go for it. And if women don't want to cover heads thats alright too because it was not a law that applied to us. It was more toward that nation, not for the Gentiles.
2007-08-14 23:52:34
·
answer #8
·
answered by airlines charge for the seat. 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
Here's a good article you may be interested in . . . you've reached a breakthrough many Christians never reach. Now don't go back . . .
http://www.theooze.com/articles/article.cfm?id=1782
The question is the difference between "Paulian" Christians -- those who seem to worship a Bible, and Followers of Christ -- those who worship a risen Lord.
Many people seem more concerned with defending the Bible, than they do with following Christ -- making disciples of all people, loving EVERYONE, for examples.
As the linked article points out -- the Bible was written by, for, and to believers. There's nothing in the New Testament written for non-Christians -- so just how important is it?
Christ tells us what to do, but to follow Christ is so incredibly difficult, that it's easier to argue pointless aspects of letters Paul wrote to a single church nearly 2,000 years ago.
Christ died. Christ was resurrected. Christ's Spirit lives.
Why would ANYTHING in the Bible be more important than that, including anything Paul has to say?
The more you learn, the closer you walk with Christ, the more difficult you'll find it, until finally, you'll find yourself alone -- just you and the holy spirit. Do not be afraid.
Godspeed.
2007-08-14 23:51:47
·
answer #9
·
answered by jimmeisnerjr 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
You can't place Paul in opposition to Christ. Paul may have come from a very conservative branch of Judaism, but nevertheless, his letters are in the Bible, and that means that they were written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Sometimes they are difficult to understand - even St. Peter says so (2 Peter 3:15-16) - but it's worth the effort to study them and to try to understand what they mean.
2007-08-14 23:38:53
·
answer #10
·
answered by kcchaplain 4
·
4⤊
1⤋
It seems this is more a matter of the culture in Corinth. Paul is telling the Corinthians to observe cultural practices that had meaning to the people of that time and place. To do otherwise would send the wrong message to the community.
2007-08-14 23:34:30
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋