Headcoverings for women? A look at Biblical interpretation

[moicherie]

"One of the members in my church, in her 90's mentioned that she felt the reason we do not see more growth in the church is that women's heads are not covered."
I would suggest when the world sees the fulfilment of John 17 in the church they will find that more attractive than women wearing heard coverings IMO

 

[tall73]

Perhaps... but then again, this is your thread (as in this is a topic you submitted for discussion, not as in you own it), I don't expect you to say anything different (as in I can tell this is what you believe, not suggesting you are not open to other thoughts)... to answer your initial question, do I think headcoverings for women are required? Nope....Are there enduring lessons to be learned? No not regarding headcoverings.

Submission is the other issue and while I hear what you are saying, I disagree. It is my belief that women are to submit to their husbands and vice versa, with both submitting to God.

I also suspect that in your view women should not hold certain roles in the church...i.e. like being an elder or a pastor. I will disagree there also... but that's another thread...

It is worth noting that I have stated several times that I am not sure about the head covering part. So I would be open to that. And I would even be open to a refutation of the submission part, but I find that far less likely. The text is pretty clear on it.

And as for women in leadership, that is not actually a different post. It is all related to the roles given.

And yes, you are right, I don't think that women should be ordained as local elders or pastors. Because it sets the order of the family on its head.

And as for single women, they submit to God, and like anyone else in the church, to church leadership. The wife of a man also submits to God, but has roles within the family that instruct her to submit to her husband. It is part of God's plan for the family.




As to John 17, I most certainly agree. I really doubt the lack of growth in the North American Church is related to head coverings.

 

[moicherie]

Since woman is man's helpmeet which order of the family is upset if a woman is an ordained elder or Pastor?

 

[StormyOne]

It is worth noting that I have stated several times that I am not sure about the head covering part. So I would be open to that. And I would even be open to a refutation of the submission part, but I find that far less likely. The text is pretty clear on it.

And as for women in leadership, that is not actually a different post. It is all related to the roles given.

And yes, you are right, I don't think that women should be ordained as local elders or pastors. Because it sets the order of the family on its head.

And as for single women, they submit to God, and like anyone else in the church, to church leadership. The wife of a man also submits to God, but has roles within the family that instruct her to submit to her husband. It is part of God's plan for the family.

As to John 17, I most certainly agree. I really doubt the lack of growth in the North American Church is related to head coverings.

The holy spirit gives gifts to the church for its edification... are you saying that the holy spirit will never give a woman the gift of pastoral ministry? Or the gift of leadership?

 

[moicherie]

Maybe I'm too sensitive but whenever I hear restrictions put on what women can and can't do in regards to church roles I just swap the word 'women' for a racial group and the sentence does not read quite that well. Like I said maybe its just me....

 

[Princessdi]

You are not wrong, where one abounds, usually so does the other. Once you delcare your superiority/control over anyone or group, it is not difficult to expand to others.

Maybe I'm too sensitive but whenever I hear restrictions put on what women can and can't do in regards to church roles I just swap the word 'women' for a racial group and the sentence does not read quite that well. Like I said maybe its just me....

 

[tall73]

You are not wrong, where one abounds, usually so does the other. Once you delcare your superiority/control over anyone or group, it is not difficult to expand to others.

Yes, you better take that up with God right away.


But until you do I am going to go with the communication He has already given us. And while I hear a lot of talk, and even some accusations that I (and anyone else apparently who agrees with this) am a racist, I have not yet heard a refutation of my ideas FROM the Scriptures. If you recall the purpose of this thread is discussion of the Bible text. I await your line by line analysis of this text.

 

[StormyOne]

Yes, you better take that up with God right away.


But until you do I am going to go with the communication He has already given us. And while I hear a lot of talk, and even some accusations that I (and anyone else apparently who agrees with this) am a racist, I have not yet heard a refutation of my ideas FROM the Scriptures. If you recall the purpose of this thread is discussion of the Bible text. I await your line by line analysis of this text.

You missed my question.....

The holy spirit gives gifts to the church for its edification... are you saying that the holy spirit will never give a woman the gift of pastoral ministry? Or the gift of leadership?

 

[Princessdi]

Sorry, Tall, no implications of you being racist. I don't know you, and for all I know your wife could be black, right? Furthermore, I would be a HUGE hypocrite to protesting assumptions made about me in one thread and making my own erroneous ones in yet another.

Now back to our regularly schedued programming.........About women in leadership, we do have an example of how God feels about it in Judges 4 with the story of Deborah, who was Judge over everyone in ALL 12 tribes of Israel, not just the women.....and the Levis were the priests, correct? So as I see it God Himself appointed Deborah as Judge, so He has no problem with women in leadership. Also, if a godly woman knows she is to submit first to God and then to her husband, then there should be no conflict. I thinkthe conflict maybe that a husband might have a problem becuase his wife maybe an elder and he may not, and at church he may feel uncomfortable to submitting to her as part of church leadership, but this has nothing to do with God, and but a man's insecurity. I know many women elders, including my Mom, whose homes are wonderful, and there are no problems as you describe at all. They all seem to be reconciling the two quite well, but then the men I think of are strong men of God who don't have any insecurities where women, in particular their wives are concerned.

Yes, you better take that up with God right away.


But until you do I am going to go with the communication He has already given us. And while I hear a lot of talk, and even some accusations that I (and anyone else apparently who agrees with this) am a racist, I have not yet heard a refutation of my ideas FROM the Scriptures. If you recall the purpose of this thread is discussion of the Bible text. I await your line by line analysis of this text.

 

[tall73]

You missed my question.....

No, I did not. And you missed my answer back in post one, and later to your clarification on teaching.

I think the Spirit calls women to

prophesy
teach
etc.

But not to hold spiritual authority in the church. It is the Bible's view. If the Holy Spirit did want to do things differently then perhaps the Bible would have said something else. Because the Bible affirms that it was authored by the Holy Spirit carrying people along.

So again. I await a LINE BY LINE, verse by verse study of the text in question.

 

[tall73]

Sorry, Tall, no implications of you being racist. I don't know you, and for all I know your wife could be black, right? Furthermore, I would be a HUGE hypocrite to protesting assumptions made about me in one thread and making my own erroneous ones in yet another.

Now back to our regularly schedued programming.........About women in leadership, we do have an example of how God feels about it in Judges 4 with the story of Deborah, who was Judge over everyone in ALL 12 tribes of Israel, not just the women.....and the Levis were the priests, correct? So as I see it God Himself appointed Deborah as Judge, so He has no problem with women in leadership. Also, if a godly woman knows she is to submit first to God and then to her husband, then there should be no conflict. I thinkthe conflict maybe that a husband might have a problem becuase his wife maybe an elder and he may not, and at church he may feel uncomfortable to submitting to her as part of church leadership, but this has nothing to do with God, and but a man's insecurity. I know many women elders, including my Mom, whose homes are wonderful, and there are no problems as you describe at all. They all seem to be reconciling the two quite well, but then the men I think of are strong men of God who don't have any insecurities where women, in particular their wives are concerned.

a. so then how did you take this comment? And why did you agree with it by stating that it is often the case that those who hold this view extend it to others? I am not trying to be less than gracious in accepting an apology. But I don't know how else to take this than that you were implying I would be tending to racism. So are you sorry for saying it, or sorry that it was misunderstood?

Maybe I'm too sensitive but whenever I hear restrictions put on what women can and can't do in regards to church roles I just swap the word 'women' for a racial group and the sentence does not read quite that well. Like I said maybe its just me....

You are not wrong, where one abounds, usually so does the other. Once you delcare your superiority/control over anyone or group, it is not difficult to expand to others.

b. Notice the story in Judges:

JDG 4:4 Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, was leading Israel at that time. 5 She held court under the Palm of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in the hill country of Ephraim, and the Israelites came to her to have their disputes decided. 6 She sent for Barak son of Abinoam from Kedesh in Naphtali and said to him, "The LORD, the God of Israel, commands you: `Go, take with you ten thousand men of Naphtali and Zebulun and lead the way to Mount Tabor. 7 I will lure Sisera, the commander of Jabin's army, with his chariots and his troops to the Kishon River and give him into your hands.' "

JDG 4:8 Barak said to her, "If you go with me, I will go; but if you don't go with me, I won't go."

JDG 4:9 "Very well," Deborah said, "I will go with you. But because of the way you are going about this, the honor will not be yours, for the LORD will hand Sisera over to a woman." So Deborah went with Barak to Kedesh, 10 where he summoned Zebulun and Naphtali. Ten thousand men followed him, and Deborah also went with him.

a. She was a prophetess. A role I already affirmed long ago, and just again that a woman can hold. We see several examples of this in the Bible. Prophecy is a gift. The election to serve as an elder is not a gift, but was an authoritative role.

The prophet will of course often settle disputes etc, just as we see EGW doing. But did she ever claim an authoritative role as an elder? This of course has been historically tossed back and forth often. But I think you will find she didn't.

b. The Lord actually did not put her in charge of this mission. She told her to tell Barak. But Barak was a wimp. So she took charge. But notice her counsel to him:

JDG 4:9 "Very well," Deborah said, "I will go with you. But because of the way you are going about this, the honor will not be yours, for the LORD will hand Sisera over to a woman."

She points out even here that this was not God's will, but an exception, and that Barak is in fact bringing this about by his unwillingness to do what God asks.

Incidentally, I am often asked what happens if a man will not take his role as head of the household spiritually. In that case, just as in that of Deborah's the woman must take the role. Otherwise it will not get done. So I have no problem with this text. Just as the roles were established for a reason in a sinful world, the roles are in fact subject to the weakness of sinful pepole.

But all of this has yet to show how God intends for women to fill the role of Elder in a church setting, rather than the role of prophetess which I affirmed from the outset.

A listing of the women around Paul would point out that there were prophetesses, fellow workers, etc. Yet he still affirmed that they would not be permitted to hold authority. Why was that?

 

[tall73]

Since you are introducing new texts to the equation, Let us have you all explain the following:

1TI 2:11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15 But women will be saved through childbearing--if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

1PE 3:1 Wives, in the same way be submissive to your husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives, 2 when they see the purity and reverence of your lives. 3 Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as braided hair and the wearing of gold jewelry and fine clothes. 4 Instead, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God's sight. 5 For this is the way the holy women of the past who put their hope in God used to make themselves beautiful. They were submissive to their own husbands, 6 like Sarah, who obeyed Abraham and called him her master. You are her daughters if you do what is right and do not give way to fear.

1PE 3:7 Husbands, in the same way be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect as the weaker partner and as heirs with you of the gracious gift of life, so that nothing will hinder your prayers.

 

[Princessdi]

Ok, so doesn't it require that a woman has some spiritual authority if she teaches and prophesies in the church? Is hse only teaching and prophecying to other women and children? She must have spiritual authority, or else a man would not bound to heed to her teachings or prophecying. Also in Biblical times, even the kings governed themselves, their decisions by the word of the prophet. This is also true of EGW, as much of our doctrine was created or even fined tuned by her words. She was a woman and that is definitely spiritual authority.

Now Pastor, I have no line by line study for you, but only these common sense questions. God is not a God of confusion. Why would He choose a woman as a prophet, if as you say, it is biblical that if a woman carried spiritual authority over her husband, (as she would, James was a Pastor not a prophet and also submitted to her counsel as a prophet), then it would adversely affect the structure of the home? Why did He not choose James in order to preserve said structure? Why would God choose a woman to be in such a a position of spiritual authority and then we assume He would frown upon a woman being an ordained elder or pastor?

BTW, as an aside, were you aware that during EGW time, even though she was not ordained, there were many, perhaps 30+ women ordained to preach within our denomination, and that only after the death iof EGW and those women did our denomination take the stance that women were not to be ordained? Also, EGW herself gave no counsel on this subject, even though she was asked about it. I know I have this information somewhere, and will try to post it within the next few days in I find it.

No, I did not. And you missed my answer back in post one, and later to your clarification on teaching.

I think the Spirit calls women to

prophesy
teach
etc.

But not to hold spiritual authority in the church. It is the Bible's view. If the Holy Spirit did want to do things differently then perhaps the Bible would have said something else. Because the Bible affirms that it was authored by the Holy Spirit carrying people along.

So again. I await a LINE BY LINE, verse by verse study of the text in question.

 

[tall73]

Here is another text regarding the role of women in the church. This one seems difficult to resolve for all sides because of some of the details.

1CO 14:26 What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be done for the strengthening of the church. 27 If anyone speaks in a tongue, two--or at the most three--should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret. 28 If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God.

1CO 14:29 Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said. 30 And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop. 31 For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged. 32 The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets. 33 For God is not a God of disorder but of peace.
As in all the congregations of the saints, 34 women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. 35 If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.

1CO 14:36 Did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has reached? 37 If anybody thinks he is a prophet or spiritually gifted, let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord's command. 38 If he ignores this, he himself will be ignored.

1CO 14:39 Therefore, my brothers, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. 40 But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way.

A. the text, like the one on head coverings, is speaking of propriety in worship.

B. Submission is again emphasized.

C. Women are told to clarify at home with their husbands.

D. Women are told not to speak.

E. However, notice that in the instruction regarding head coverings he already made provision for a woman, with her head covered, to prophesy. The context seems to suggest public worship.

F. The stress on this text is on orderlyness throughout.

G. Some have surmised that the women were asking for clarification during the service, and have even suggested that the women were on different sides of the church. First of all it is not said in the text that they are on different sides. Though it may be inferred from some of the historical notes. But it is also not clear exactly what setting this is in. Is it an actual church building? This seems unlikely since they often met at homes etc. For that matter, each one was to share something etc. So it is probably not even the traditional service. So whether they were sitting on different sides is really up in the air. And in the end it doesn't really matter.

H. The issue could as some suggest be that, like those who were all prophesying at once the women were disrupting the service by speaking to their husbands during the service, while others were prophesying.

There are however some propblems with this.

1. Submission is given for the reason for silence.

2. It says it was this way in all the churches of God. So that doesn't sound to be just an isolated incident.

Some possible solutions:

a. Paul was a nut. Well, it is a solution for some, I am not going with that one though.

b. Women were allowed to prophesy, but not in public worship, only outside of it. They were not allowed to speak at all in church because of submission. Well this would settle it, but it doesn't seem to match later Adventist experience in the case of EGW. But the, is EGW the final interpreter of Scripture? Many who say no suddenly think she is in this case.

c. Women were allowed to prophesy or bring a word of encouragement during the service, but were not allowed to question others' teaching. Seems an odd distinction if so. But I guess it fits the data for the most part.

d. Women were not allowed to clarify with their husbands thus interrupting the service going on. Doesn't seem to fit with the idea of in all the churches of God.

 

[tall73]

Ok, so doesn't it require that a woman has some spiritual authority if she teaches and prophesies in the church? Is hse only teaching and prophecying to other women and children? She must have spiritual authority, or else a man would not bound to heed to her teachings or prophecying. Also in Biblical times, even the kings governed themselves, their decisions by the word of the prophet. This is also true of EGW, as much of our doctrine was created or even fined tuned by her words. She was a woman and that is definitely spiritual authority.

Now Pastor, I have no line by line study for you, but only these common sense questions. God is not a God of confusion. Why would He choose a woman as a prophet, if as you say, it is biblical that if a woman carried spiritual authority over her husband, (as she would, James was a Pastor not a prophet and also submitted to her counsel as a prophet), then it would adversely affect the structure of the home? Why did He not choose James in order to preserve said structure? Why would God choose a woman to be in such a a position of spiritual authority and then we assume He would frown upon a woman being an ordained elder or pastor?

BTW, as an aside, were you aware that during EGW time, even though she was not ordained, there were many, perhaps 30+ women ordained to preach within our denomination, and that only after the death iof EGW and those women did our denomination take the stance that women were not to be ordained? Also, EGW herself gave no counsel on this subject, even though she was asked about it. I know I have this information somewhere, and will try to post it within the next few days in I find it.

I am quite aware that women even served in positions of leadership at various levels in the church.

Are you also aware that God did in fact offer the prophetic gift to two others who refused it at the time, before it went to EGW?

Moreover, while James was in fact subject to the word of the Lord through his wife she still SUBMITTED to him ,and suggested others do the same with their husband. So what does this tell us? That

a. God works through all the gifts, including prophecy.

b. That in the family He has ordained a system. And He apparently intends we follow it.

So whatever prophetic role EGW had, she did not consider it at odds with submitting to her husband. Moreover James held the leadership of the whole denomination for some time. And was in an authoritative position in the church. EGW never claimed this role. He was clearly the one in charge both in his family and in the church, along with the other authoritative leaders of that time.

Now as for women being ordained, that is true. But then some churches ordain homosexuals. Is that then making it a biblical practice? Practice does not determine theology. Theology determines practice.

There is a balance here. There are gifts given for the instruction of the church, and there are authoritative rulers for the church. This is why the Scriptures truly do say submit to one another. Because at times the authoritative rulers may hear God's message through someone else. But does this change their position?

We cannot just accept those texts that we like and dismiss the others. Isn't this what we accuse others of doing on the Sabbath etc.? That is why this is a particularly interesting example to look at for scriptural interpretation.

So how do we interpret the texts I have listed in light of the others? And to do this you DO have to go line by line through them, or else you are simply rationalizing them away because they don't agree with a notion you already have.

We have always said that you base doctrine on ALL of the evidence of Scripture. So let's do it.


So again, remember, the issue is not only women's role (it is an issue to be sure, but not THE issue with this thread), the issue is how we approach
Scripture. Will we look at ALL the evidence? Or just dismiss that which we don't like?

 

[StormyOne]

No, I did not. And you missed my answer back in post one, and later to your clarification on teaching.

I think the Spirit calls women to

prophesy
teach
etc.

But not to hold spiritual authority in the church. It is the Bible's view. If the Holy Spirit did want to do things differently then perhaps the Bible would have said something else. Because the Bible affirms that it was authored by the Holy Spirit carrying people along.

So again. I await a LINE BY LINE, verse by verse study of the text in question.

If in Christ there is no Jew, Gentile, male female? Then the H.S. can give whatever gifts he chooses to whomever including those involving leadership....

 

[tall73]

If in Christ there is no Jew, Gentile, male female? Then the H.S. can give whatever gifts he chooses to whomever including those involving leadership....

The question is not what the Holy Spirit can do. The question is what the Holy Spirit said in the Scriptures. If you would like to demonstrate where it said that women would be ordained in authoritative positions, feel free.

What you have said is clearly a text talking about worth and salvation in Christ. And in that context it is quite true. But then why do Paul and Peter persist in saying what they did about submission?


If you are just taking the texts you like so that you can dismiss other ones, then that is not good interpreting. We must take all the evidence and make sense of it. Not take the evidence that agrees with us and quit.

 

[Princessdi]

so then how did you take this comment? And why did you agree with it by stating that it is often the case that those who hold this view extend it to others? I am not trying to be less than gracious in accepting an apology. But I don't know how else to take this than that you were implying I would be tending to racism. So are you sorry for saying it, or sorry that it was misunderstood?

I am saying exactly what is says that if your start declaring superiority over one group it not difficult to declare it over others. It is something we should be aware of, I did not mean that you, personally had fallen victim to it. yes, I am apologizing for any misunderstanding. I am truly enjoying this discussion and don't want it lost on a misunderstanding. For future reference, I rarely post personal attacks, and if I do it is not subtle, I say what I got to say and let it go, it is only through growth in my relaitnship with Christ that I have learned to be tactful, so subtly is defintley not my strong suit.

a. She was a prophetess. A role I already affirmed long ago, and just again that a woman can hold. We see several examples of this in the Bible. Prophecy is a gift. The election to serve as an elder is not a gift, but was an authoritative role.

The prophet will of course often settle disputes etc, just as we see EGW doing. But did she ever claim an authoritative role as an elder? This of course has been historically tossed back and forth often. But I think you will find she didn't.

b. The Lord actually did not put her in charge of this mission. She told her to tell Barak. But Barak was a wimp. So she took charge. But notice her counsel to him:


She points out even here that this was not God's will, but an exception, and that Barak is in fact bringing this about by his unwillingness to do what God asks.

A listing of the women around Paul would point out that there were prophetesses, fellow workers, etc. Yet he still affirmed that they would not be permitted to hold authority. Why was that?

Actually she was both, the COI came to Judges for individual/tribal disputes. She sat as a judge just like Samson and all the rest. But then I didn't read that Samson was a also prophet. And still even as you say she was a only a prophtess, she was married and had spriitual authority of the men, which you say breaks down the structure of of the home. The point is not what position she held but that she had spiritual authority over men, Something you say that God does not intend for women to have because of out it affects His planned structure for the home. Now, there were many, many men at the time, once again I ask why did God, and we know at the time He personally chose Prophets and Judges, choose a women to such a position of spiritual authority, if He was concerned with preserving man's authority in the home?

Also in you question about the women around Paul, if they Indeed were Prpophtess, and we believe they were, they would have spiritual authority of even Paul, if he was to heed to their counsel. What would be the point of having women as prophets, and Paul and the other men not heed their counsel because they are women. Are we agreed that prophet's/prophetess' counsel come from direct communication with God? Is this not why they are chosen? If they already prophtess, why would they also need to be elders, does not prophtess hold a higher spiritual authority? Ok maybe I got this all wrong, please correct me if I hae misunderstood these roles.


I agree about Barak, her counsel to him was right the women won the day because he was a wimp in his lack of faith.

 

[StormyOne]

Paul said what he did because in fact he was from that system where men ruled... while some of what he said was radical for that time, he was still a creature of his culture... The bible is a reflection of that culture too, women are mentioned as needed but clearly there were women who impacted the lives of those telling the story...

To suggest that because men moved by the H.S. wrote the scriptures and set out "eternal" guidelines for the role of women is a stretch IMO....

 

[StormyOne]

The question is not what the Holy Spirit can do. The question is what the Holy Spirit said in the Scriptures. If you would like to demonstrate where it said that women would be ordained in authoritative positions, feel free.

What you have said is clearly a text talking about worth and salvation in Christ. And in that context it is quite true. But then why do Paul and Peter persist in saying what they did about submission?


If you are just taking the texts you like so that you can dismiss other ones, then that is not good interpreting. We must take all the evidence and make sense of it. Not take the evidence that agrees with us and quit.

Peter and Paul were creatures of their culture... and they counseled women to submit... I am not picking and choosing texts anymore than we usually do, however clearly they were speaking to that culture in that time... so no I do not think that their words about women's roles are set in stone or are applicable today...