Did anyone notice, most of the members saying yes to this question were men?
Does that matter?
Probably not in light of the fact that the majority of members at CF are men and the majority of members who post at CF are men. What it tells me is that men have more time to post than women.
As I read that, it refers to women engaging in congregational activity--corporate prayer or prophesy during the service. A number of fundamental congregations don't allow women to engage in those activities in the first place.
When I was a kid, women covered their heads. In fact, the ushers at the door had supplies of lace doilies they'd hand out to a woman who wasn't already wearing a hat or some other covering.
but we are criticized because women do not teach and exercise authority over men.
Something to realize is that when Paul wrote that particular line, what he had in mind as a "teacher" was a master-disciple relationship, such as Jesus with his own disciples. The closest to that in our understanding would be a Japanese "Sensei."
"Teachers," as Paul knew them, had punitive authority over their students and created the doctrine their students followed.
Paul would not regard someone who merely stood before a class and read a prepared less, or someone who "expounded the gospel" as being a teacher.
It may owe to the fact that this is the forum for "Denomination-specific theology." People check in expecting, as I do, to find debates about issues identified with particular denominations. With this thread, that wasn't the case.There was no response to this posting. Must admit I am a little disappointed.
Why is that? Would you please elaborate on this idea?It strikes me as pandering to Islam, but that is just my idea.
It strikes me as pandering to Islam, but that is just my idea.
I have no idea, but I do feel that this was a custom that was basically part of the early church, and died out with Vatican II.
Sure, if her head's cold. Otherwise, it's an issue of pious freedom.
It strikes me as pandering to Islam, but that is just my idea.
It may owe to the fact that this is the forum for "Denomination-specific theology." People check in expecting, as I do, to find debates about issues identified with particular denominations. With this thread, that wasn't the case.
My understanding of this head covering recommendation by Paul is because of the city the corinthians lived in.
Corinth was a Pagan city with evil religions and a a temple with prostitutes who had shaved heads.
I Corinthians 11:1.
Maybe some of the prostitutes came to salvation and ended up in the corinthians church and Paul recommended long hair head coverings so as to differentiate the girls from the prostitutes symbolism of that time.
Do I think hat wearing or scarves is relevant or recommended today..NO! It was I think for an issue they had then that has long since passed. Pauls recommendation of long hair for girls is timeless.
thats my best understanding of it anyway. I heard a great preacher talk about that one day and always remembered it.