Pastor Gino Jennings, Make It Plain.

[Evang.Benincasa]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jlbWDXG-uM&ab_channel=TonyHarvin

[Esaias]

"Am I right? You KNOW I'm right!"

[Evang.Benincasa]

"Am I right? You KNOW I'm right!"

:happydance

[Truthseeker]

He mentions not changing God's natural appearance but he is clean shaved. Lol

[Evang.Benincasa]

He mentions not changing God's natural appearance but he is clean shaved. Lol

No he is not, as long as I have known him he has facial hair.

[MawMaw]

I don't know this Preacher, but he does tell it plain! :nod

[Truthseeker]

No he is not, as long as I have known him he has facial hair.

He just has a mustache, which he got by altering his face by shabijg. Changing what God created.

[Truthseeker]

I agree with him about the makeup and modesty. I just wish there was more clear scripture on it. He mentions jeremiah 4 but that doesn't really show a prohibition against makeup.

[Evang.Benincasa]

I agree with him about the makeup and modesty. I just wish there was more clear scripture on it. He mentions jeremiah 4 but that doesn't really show a prohibition against makeup.

Destroying her face with make up?

I think that is pretty plain. Listen we are dealing with a culture that has gone way past all of that. Pastor Gino Jennings is correct on the state of the churches.
In 10 more years it will only get worse not better. In vain thy make thyself fair. Holiness make up? Hey, guys are painting their fingernails and wearing make up, what next?

[Amanah]

Men and Women looking like prostitutes in the church



6107

6108

[Truthseeker]

Men and Women looking like prostitutes in the church



6107

6108


Not sure about, a prostitute might look better than her. :)

[Aquila]

Ah... That ol' familiar opening...

"Greetings Brothers, and Sisters, Friends and Enemies."
Gotta love it!

It was through listening to Jennings and studying the Scripture that I came to the understanding that I Corinthians 11 is about head coverings.

[robogreg_2000]

Does it really matter if a person wears make up? That is between the individual and God! I have seen some women who never wore makeup,but they were as mean as a famished lioness ! There are some men who say that women should not wear toe and heel out shoes! If a woman ś heels and toes are going to cause a man to become full of lust,he is a sick puppy anyway!

[Amanah]

Does it really matter if a person wears make up? That is between the individual and God! I have seen some women who never wore makeup,but they were as mean as a famished lioness ! There are some men who say that women should not wear toe and heel out shoes! If a woman ś heels and toes are going to cause a man to become full of lust,he is a sick puppy anyway!

It matters to a lost world if the church looks like a hooker or not. They are looking for deliverance.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Does it really matter if a person wears make up? That is between the individual and God! I have seen some women who never wore makeup,but they were as mean as a famished lioness ! There are some men who say that women should not wear toe and heel out shoes! If a woman ś heels and toes are going to cause a man to become full of lust,he is a sick puppy anyway!

Brother Gino Jennings gives an explanation to the above. Also saying that an unchurched individual shouldn't have a problem with lusting after a female dressed a certain way is mistaken. Brother Gino Jennings points out that everything from cars to cornflakes (my words) is sold with a scantily clad female. Why because to the carnal male that is where the focus goes.
Jesus warns married men that if they were even to look upon a woman with lust they were in adultery. So, Jesus knew their was a problem. The Bible also states that there is an attire of a harlot Proverb 17:10 Then out came a woman to meet him, dressed like a prostitute and with crafty intent. Doesn't get any plainer than that.

1 Timothy 2:9

Likewise, I want the women to adorn themselves with respectable apparel, with modesty, and with self-control, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes,

The above is Paul speaking about women in Timothy's congregation. He says he wants them to be dressed in "respectable" attire, which would be the opposite of being dressed like a prostitute.

[Aquila]

Does it really matter if a person wears make up? That is between the individual and God! I have seen some women who never wore makeup,but they were as mean as a famished lioness ! There are some men who say that women should not wear toe and heel out shoes! If a woman ś heels and toes are going to cause a man to become full of lust,he is a sick puppy anyway!

If a woman isn't prayerful, modest, and submitted, her makeup is in vain.

[Evang.Benincasa]

It matters to a lost world if the church looks like a hooker or not. They are looking for deliverance.

Brother Gino Jennings makes the statement if he came into the studio with a blood red suit, bright yellow neck tie, hair extensions, and gold rings on every finger. What would he look like? Some churches people look like they are going to the club, not the church. We are called to come as we are, not stay as we are.

[consapente89]

Brother Gino Jennings gives an explanation to the above. Also saying that an unchurched individual shouldn't have a problem with lusting after a female dressed a certain way is mistaken. Brother Gino Jennings points out that everything from cars to cornflakes (my words) is sold with a scantily clad female. Why because to the carnal male that is where the focus goes.
Jesus warns married men that if they were even to look upon a woman with lust they were in adultery. So, Jesus knew their was a problem. The Bible also states that there is an attire of a harlot Proverb 17:10 Then out came a woman to meet him, dressed like a prostitute and with crafty intent. Doesn't get any plainer than that.

1 Timothy 2:9

Likewise, I want the women to adorn themselves with respectable apparel, with modesty, and with self-control, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes,

The above is Paul speaking about women in Timothy's congregation. He says he wants them to be dressed in "respectable" attire, which would be the opposite of being dressed like a prostitute.

What about unmarried men?

[Evang.Benincasa]

What about unmarried men?

We are dealing with a situation that these people didn't have dating. Laws were in place for male and female interaction. Some laws concerning rape would be barbaric to our Christian minds. Yet, they were all in place during the time of Christ. The Apostle Paul tells the Church (young men included) to entreat old women as mothers and younger women as sisters 1 Timothy 5:2. This would cover young men getting too carried away.

[Aquila]

Gino Jennings is quite a gentleman when talking one on one and on a personal level. His most controversial responses are typically in regards to the letters sent to his ministry, which he addresses rather boldly, without pulling any punches.

I like what he said to K Foxx when she asked, "What would be your assessment of me as a woman?", with regards to her makeup, etc. Jennings then said, "My assessment wouldn't be anything. But from a biblical perspective...", and he then launches into Jeremiah 4:30.

I like that. He didn't personally insult her. In fact, he was very pleasant. He then moved into Scripture and shared his perspective of what the Bible teaches.

[Aquila]

What about unmarried men?

It is sin for any man to look upon a woman and desire to use her like an object created merely for the gratification of his lusts. While Christ's words imply that he was primarily addressing married men (His use of the word "adultery"), keep in mind that most men were married in that culture.

Matthew 5:28
But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Of course, I think one would be hard pressed to insist that looking upon a woman to lust after her is prohibited for the married but permitted for the unmarried. To look upon anyone with the desire to use them for one's one selfish gratification of one's carnal lusts is dehumanizing whether one is married or not.

[Truthseeker]

Gino Jennings is quite a gentleman when talking one on one and on a personal level. His most controversial responses are typically in regards to the letters sent to his ministry, which he addresses rather boldly, without pulling any punches.

I like what he said to K Foxx when she asked, "What would be your assessment of me as a woman?", with regards to her makeup, etc. Jennings then said, "My assessment wouldn't be anything. But from a biblical perspective...", and he then launches into Jeremiah 4:30.

I like that. He didn't personally insult her. In fact, he was very pleasant. He then moved into Scripture and shared his perspective of what the Bible teaches.


Is jeremiah 4:30 really a prohibition against makeup?

[Aquila]

Is jeremiah 4:30 really a prohibition against makeup?

I don't take it as such. I see the point being... you can decorate the outside all you like, but it doesn't hide the sinful ugliness of a spiritually unfaithful heart.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Is jeremiah 4:30 really a prohibition against makeup?

It sure isn't a positive.

[Truthseeker]

Sin is transgression of the law. Where in the law does it forbid makeup?

[Amanah]

Sin is transgression of the law. Where in the law does it forbid makeup?

First of all, we are to obey the apostles’ doctrine

2 Timothy 3:16 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

Romans 6:17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.

The apostles taught that women were not to beautify themselves with outward adorning, but with modesty and humility and good works.

1 Peter 3:3 Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;4 But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.5 For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands:6 Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.

1 Timothy 2:9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; 10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Sin is transgression of the law. Where in the law does it forbid makeup?

Leviticus 19:29 the children of Israel were admonished by the law not to degrade their daughters in temple prostitution. Proverbs 7:10 prostitutes were recognizable by not only their clothing but their facial paint was used primarily by the prostitute (pagans) to allure Jeremiah 4:29-31. Temple prostitution was a big deal to the pagan groups who surrounded Israel. Even the Vestal virgins of Rome were highly honored among Romans, but despised by Judeans. Prostitutes were known for their painted eyelids, females, and males. We get so caught up with females and make up. But I sadly don't live in Sunny Brook Farm. Here I have young men who wear make up, piercings, and have long painted finger nails. Is that now the new normal? It isn't new, it is just the church has been asleep at the wheel, and riders got on the bus you weren't expecting. So, what are you going to do about it now?


Being Holy as He is Holy. That is the law, and we are to separate ourselves from the paganism around us, the sin that is around us, the crossdressing that is around us. Do we now tell young boys, emo, and goths that make up is only for women? Sad commentary that the church tried to become the world to win the world. Only to be impregnated by the world with mess and remorse.

Ephesians 1:4 Even before he made the world, God loved us and chose us in Christ to be holy and without fault in his eyes.

That admonishment from Paul was a call to separation to not only not act like the world (which was a pagan Greek/Roman Empire), but not look like the world.

[Aquila]

Ancient peoples of the Near East used power and rouge, red and yellow colors being obtained from ochers, and white from lead carbonate. Both of these materials are known from excavations, and other sources indicate the use of powder puffs in Egypt. One Biblical reference to powder, in the cosmetic sense, is in the Song of Solomon 3:6, wherein the "powders" of a merchant, for cosmetic use, are brought as a gift to the bride to be.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Ancient people of the near and Middle East were pagans.

[Truthseeker]

Ancient people of the near and Middle East were pagans.

And yet there is not one command against it.

[Evang.Benincasa]

And yet there is not one command against it.

I already went through the Torah information concerning not allowing your daughters to be prostitutes. How prostitution was not only what they did but how they looked. Yet, eyeliner, lip paint, and finger and toenail polish on men was also part of temple prostitution. I don't know where you live or what you do, but around these parts young men have green, pink dyed hair, painted finger nails, and toe nails. The young men wear eyeliner, and lipstick. So, you have no book? Then I wish you well in your church experience sitting on a pew and listening to a pastor with black fingernails, and black eyeliner.

[RachelRose]

Boy this name is familiar. I think I listened to him on the radio many years ago in LA.

[RachelRose]

:happydance

Gino does not have a beard in this video posted from the FOX interview.

[RachelRose]

Ah... That ol' familiar opening...

"Greetings Brothers, and Sisters, Friends and Enemies."
Gotta love it!

It was through listening to Jennings and studying the Scripture that I came to the understanding that I Corinthians 11 is about head coverings.

Aquila you make a great point in that post for two reasons:

1) I love to listen to many sides of an issue
2) head cover VS hair cover is debatable

[Aquila]

Ancient people of the near and Middle East were pagans.

Song of Solomon 3:6
6 Who is this that cometh out of the wilderness like pillars of smoke, perfumed with myrrh and frankincense, with all powders of the merchant?

It is unclear exactly what the powders of the merchant entailed. Seeing that it states "all the powders of the merchant", the one thing we do know is that these merchants were apothecaries. The apothecary was skilled in the creation of perfumes, incense, oils, balms, cosmetics, and even the use of spiced teas and herbal remedies. It would therefore imply that Solomon came bringing all these things as gifts to his bride.

It should also be noted that the name of Job’s daughter, as “Horn of Antimony,” or “Keren-happuch” (horn of black eye-paint) in Job 42:14 does not carry a negative or sinful connotation, since in 42:15 this daughter as well as the others is counted as best in the land. It might be that she was named after an ornate cosmetic container (a horn) or that her mother (Job's wife) wore such beautiful eye-paint.

Green color was derived from malachite or turquoise, and used to paint the lower eyelids; while black came from manganese (puk) or antimony (kuhl), and was applied to the eyebrows and lashes. Red ocher was used to add lip color. Large numbers of small pottery juglets, usually fired in a reducing atmosphere to produce a lustrous and burnished black finish, also come from the excavations of this period. A cosmetic kit from the Biblical period might contain a polished metal mirror, palette, ivory and metal spatulas, kohl sticks, unguent spoons, tweezers and a variety of containers.

In addition to the minerals named above, galena and stibnite also were ground in the palettes. These powders (possible reference, Song of Solomon 3:6) were then mixed with water or gum before application. The powder was likely stored and carried in pouches. The Bible frequently associates eye paint with questionable women, who made excessive use of it (cf. 2 Kings 9:30; Jer 4:30; Ezek 23:40). In addition to beautification, the eye paint probably had some hygienic effect, in discouraging disease-carrying flies.

The negative texts mentioning cosmetics (2 Kings 9:30, Jer. 4:30, Eze. 23:40) do not condemn cosmetics specifically. However, they do reveal the seductive nature of those women who use cosmetics to enhance their beauty so that they might entice men into sin.

As it relates to Christian women, Paul wrote:

1 Timothy 2:9
In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; 10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.

Shamefacedness is the manner of one's face, or facial expressions, being kept in a state of modesty and humility. It is the opposite of being shameless, arrogant, and beaming with pride. This could very well indicate that cosmetics are to be discouraged, however in Near Eastern ancient culture a properly mannered woman rarely looked a man directly in the eyes. Instead, after immediate eye contact, she would turn her gaze away below his line of sight, expressing submission and respect. This practice is still common in the Middle East today, especially among Muslim women. In these Eastern cultures, to look a man in the eye while talking to him is considered ill mannered, seductive, or disrespectful depending upon circumstance.

So, while the Bible is neutral on makeup, it is not neutral on one's attitude and character. We do well not to make up a law where one doesn't exist. So it is hard to argue that makeup is a "sin" in and of itself. However, we can encourage modesty and natural beauty in principle as it relates to being separate from the world.

[RachelRose]

Song of Solomon 3:6
6 Who is this that cometh out of the wilderness like pillars of smoke, perfumed with myrrh and frankincense, with all powders of the merchant?

It is unclear exactly what the powders of the merchant entailed. Seeing that it states "all the powders of the merchant", the one thing we do know is that these merchants were apothecaries. The apothecary was skilled in the creation of perfumes, incense, oils, balms, cosmetics, and even the use of spiced teas and herbal remedies. It would therefore imply that Solomon came bringing all these things as gifts to his bride.

It should also be noted that the name of Job’s daughter, as “Horn of Antimony,” or “Keren-happuch” (horn of black eye-paint) in Job 42:14 does not carry a negative or sinful connotation, since in 42:15 this daughter as well as the others is counted as best in the land. It might be that she was named after an ornate cosmetic container (a horn) or that her mother (Job's wife) wore such beautiful eye-paint.

Green color was derived from malachite or turquoise, and used to paint the lower eyelids; while black came from manganese (puk) or antimony (kuhl), and was applied to the eyebrows and lashes. Red ocher was used to add lip color. Large numbers of small pottery juglets, usually fired in a reducing atmosphere to produce a lustrous and burnished black finish, also come from the excavations of this period. A cosmetic kit from the Biblical period might contain a polished metal mirror, palette, ivory and metal spatulas, kohl sticks, unguent spoons, tweezers and a variety of containers.

In addition to the minerals named above, galena and stibnite also were ground in the palettes. These powders (possible reference, Song of Solomon 3:6) were then mixed with water or gum before application. The powder was likely stored and carried in pouches. The Bible frequently associates eye paint with questionable women, who made excessive use of it (cf. 2 Kings 9:30; Jer 4:30; Ezek 23:40). In addition to beautification, the eye paint probably had some hygienic effect, in discouraging disease-carrying flies.

The negative texts mentioning cosmetics (2 Kings 9:30, Jer. 4:30, Eze. 23:40) do not condemn cosmetics specifically. However, they do reveal the seductive nature of those women who use cosmetics to enhance their beauty so that they might entice men into sin.

As it relates to Christian women, Paul wrote:

1 Timothy 2:9
In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; 10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.

Shamefacedness is the manner of one's face, or facial expressions, being kept in a state of modesty and humility. It is the opposite of being shameless, arrogant, and beaming with pride. This could very well indicate that cosmetics are to be discouraged, however in Near Eastern ancient culture a properly mannered woman rarely looked a man directly in the eyes. Instead, after immediate eye contact, she would turn her gaze away below his line of sight, expressing submission and respect. This practice is still common in the Middle East today, especially among Muslim women. In these Eastern cultures, to look a man in the eye while talking to him is considered ill mannered, seductive, or disrespectful depending upon circumstance.

So, while the Bible is neutral on makeup, it is not neutral on one's attitude and character. We do well not to make up a law where one doesn't exist. So it is hard to argue that makeup is a "sin" in and of itself. However, we can encourage modesty and natural beauty in principle as it relates to being separate from the world.

Aquila this is why I enjoy reading your posts. You do not just give short, two word responses. You dig deep into history. By doing this you challenge the Pentecostal Traditions we have here in2018.

I dare say if we make it to see Jesus face to face he will be displease with all our efforts to keep what we thought was important and did not do his simple instructions.

You have no idea how much "heat" I take from other (older) members of the faith.

[Truthseeker]

I already went through the Torah information concerning not allowing your daughters to be prostitutes. How prostitution was not only what they did but how they looked. Yet, eyeliner, lip paint, and finger and toenail polish on men was also part of temple prostitution. I don't know where you live or what you do, but around these parts young men have green, pink dyed hair, painted finger nails, and toe nails. The young men wear eyeliner, and lipstick. So, you have no book? Then I wish you well in your church experience sitting on a pew and listening to a pastor with black fingernails, and black eyeliner.


Is there any scripture that show only prostitutes wore makeup and nor the OT saints? "Attire of a harlot" what was the attire?


For the record, i believe makeup is not becoming of a woman desiring holiness, I just wish scripture was more clear on the subject.

[Aquila]

Aquila this is why I enjoy reading your posts. You do not just give short, two word responses. You dig deep into history. By doing this you challenge the Pentecostal Traditions we have here in2018.

I dare say if we make it to see Jesus face to face he will be displease with all our efforts to keep what we thought was important and did not do his simple instructions.

You have no idea how much "heat" I take from other (older) members of the faith.

Thank you for the encouragement. :)

What concerns me personally is that if my faith is built on a number of laws designed by man (no short sleeves, no shorts, no rings, no television, no internet, no beards, etc., etc., etc.),... I end up living, practicing, and even sharing a man made religion. Both hedonism and man made religion appeal to the flesh. They just appeal to those on the opposite ends of the spectrum. But both the hedonist and the religionist are as carnal as carnal can be. Consider this, every false religion has special days, dress codes, dietary codes, rituals, innumerable legalistic requirements, etc., etc., that are required of their followers. The way of the Spirit transcends these carnal frameworks and leads one into aspiring Christlikeness, living by the Spirit, seeking to live by the divine love that abides towards both God and man. If I love my neighbor, will I entice them to sin? Will I dress in a manner that provokes lust? Will I lie to them, harm them, defraud them, steal from them, or degrade them in any way? No. If I love God will I blaspheme, bow to idols, use His name in vain, or knowingly engage in heathen practices? No, of course not. And so the single law of love becomes the mark.

Now, that isn't to say that discretion shouldn't be practiced with regards to issues that the Bible is silent or neutral about. This is where spiritual maturity is most essential.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Is there any scripture that show only prostitutes wore makeup and nor the OT saints? "Attire of a harlot" what was the attire?


For the record, i believe makeup is not becoming of a woman desiring holiness, I just wish scripture was more clear on the subject.

What is the attire? The scriptures always harps on the painting of the eyes for one, Isaiah 3:16,Jeremiah 4:30,2 Kings 9:30. Then goes onto say expensive clothing and ornaments. Mystery Babylon Mother of Harlots is arrayed with purple (expensive) and ornamentation Revelation 17:4. I don't wish, I know, wishing is for kids. You are looking for a shopping list of Thou Shalt Nots? Men who crossdress, start off with the most hideous display of make up, because in their warped demonic perversion, their maggot filled brains compel them to degrade themselves with face paint. Then they put on the wig? Usually way before they dress up in their wife's clothes. In the book of Enoch (not advocating it as scripture) it speaks that weapons of war, jewelry, and make up was shown to mankind by fallen angels.

Enoch 8:1-4 "And Azazel taught mankind to make swords and knives and shields and coats of mail, and taught them to see what was behind them, and their works of art: bracelets and ornaments, and the use of rouge, and the beautifying of the eye-brows, and the dearest and choicest stones and all coloring substances and the metals of the earth. And there was great wickedness and much fornication, and they sinned, and all their ways were corrupt. Amezarak taught all the conjurers and root-cutters, Armars the loosening of conjurations, Baraq�al the astrologers, Kïkabel the signs, and Temel taught astrology, and Asradel taught the course of the moon. And in the destruction of mankind, they cried aloud, and their voices reached heaven."

"Talmud in Tractate Yoma 9b (also in Shabbat 62b) Why was the first Sanctuary destroyed? Because of three [evil] things which prevailed there: idolatry, immorality, bloodshed… Immorality [prevailed] as it is written: “Moreover the Lord said: Because the daughters of Zion are haughty, and walk with stretched-forth necks and wanton eyes, walking and mincing as they go, and make a tinkling with their feet” Isaiah 3:16. ‘Because the daughters of Zion are haughty’, i.e., they used to walk with proud carriage. ‘And wanton eyes’ i.e., they filled their eyes with kohl (a powder used for painting the eyelids). ‘Walking and mincing as they go’, i.e., they used to walk with the heel touching the toe. ‘And make a tinkling with their feet’, R. Isaac said: They would take myrrh and balsam and place it in their shoes and they would walk around the streets of Jerusalem and when they came near the young men of Israel they would kick, causing the balsam to squirt at them and would thus cause the evil desire to enter them like an adder's poison. (Rashi in Tractate Shabbat notes that they were married women and therefore the Talmud talks about their defamation)."

Most cultures understood that make up wasn't for the godly, because the lionshare of the scripture rebuked the wearing of it. So, no wishing upon a star, no hoping for hope. The Bible is plain, but sadly people see what they want to see. My lands homosexuals see God advocating homosexuality in the Bible? Crossdressers see Deuteronomy 22:5 as only pertaining to pagan religious worship. Hey, the scriptures are plain, you just need to have people who have no agendas to read and obey.

[RachelRose]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jlbWDXG-uM&ab_channel=TonyHarvin

:highfive

I love this interview. I cannot vouch for Gino's church but I love his attitude. He took the message of modesty to place that would be hostile to it. He handled himself with skill and long suffering.

I am being completely honest here: I want to witness with that same peace. One thing he did over and over again was to quote what the Bible said. The young lady on the other side of the table was angry that wearing just a halter and "tights" somehow was asking for a rape. Her want to look "cool" completely over ruled common sense.

The Bible has MANY practical messages for us and one of them is that: all people need to be modest and covered up.

[Amanah]

:highfive

I love this interview. I cannot vouch for Gino's church but I love his attitude. He took the message of modesty to place that would be hostile to it. He handled himself with skill and long suffering.

I am being completely honest here: I want to witness with that same peace. One thing he did over and over again was to quote what the Bible said. The young lady on the other side of the table was angry that wearing just a halter and "tights" somehow was asking for a rape. Her want to look "cool" completely over ruled common sense.

The Bible has MANY practical messages for us and one of them is that: all people need to be modest and covered up.


:highfive

[Aquila]

Here's a message from Pastor Jennings that I enjoyed:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihY1a6dTjAQ

[n david]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jlbWDXG-uM&ab_channel=TonyHarvin

:thumbsup

Great interview.

Straightforward, but not unkind. Even though the woman on the show kept trying to egg him into confrontation. She was very disrespectful.

We need more Pastors and ministers like this good Pastor.

[Steve Epley]

I think he presented himself very well. :highfive

[RachelRose]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KeLn16NiIJw

I had to post this one. All good preaching.

1) the subject of this message is "church hoes"
2) his Bible Reader must have been pulled out from the world, the poor thing seems slightly embarrassed with some of the preaching
3) I agree with him, put clothes on!

[RachelRose]

Here's a message from Pastor Jennings that I enjoyed:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihY1a6dTjAQ

Seems he is going to stay right there in Huntington Park and preach. We need him. Also, he addressed leaving the US. That seems to smack down old Clinton and him fleeing to Porto Rico. I hate people that run from a fight and then preach how they are standing for God.

[Truthseeker]

One of his churches is locatrd in the town I work. He is coming in May, maybe I'll go check it out. Not sure how he can pastor several hundred miles away from the church though.

Plus, I've never seen an apostle before.:)

[houston]

*Puerto Roco

[Steve Epley]

One of his churches is locatrd in the town I work. He is coming in May, maybe I'll go check it out. Not sure how he can pastor several hundred miles away from the church though.

Plus, I've never seen an apostle before.:)

Well I have met several.:heeheehee along with two sets of two witnesses. Elijah, Joshua, and the Lord Himself in Ga. :highfive

[BuckeyeBukaroo]

Men and Women looking like prostitutes in the church



6107

6108


My sons will be forbidden to wear "skinny jeans" when it comes across their minds that that want to try to be "hip".

[BuckeyeBukaroo]

I don't like this preacher. Not my type.

[Evang.Benincasa]

My sons will be forbidden to wear "skinny jeans" when it comes across their minds that that want to try to be "hip".

You are speaking in a future tense.

How old are your sons now?

[BuckeyeBukaroo]

You are speaking in a future tense.

How old are your sons now?

Well, my first child died in the womb.
I am believing God for miracles.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Well, my first child died in the womb.
I am believing God for miracles.

You were talking about future sons you may have in the future.

I see.

[peter83]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jlbWDXG-uM&ab_channel=TonyHarvin

:thumbsup i like most of what he says.
I listened to a USA screaming-preacher that hte "woman has to wear long hair in order to be covered"...welll if a woman does not cocer her head with a veil she is still uncovered no matter how long beautifull hair has.
And if a woman preach or teaches at Church she not anemore covered..

[Apostolic1ness]

:thumbsup i like most of what he says.
I listened to a USA screaming-preacher that hte "woman has to wear long hair in order to be covered"...welll if a woman does not cocer her head with a veil she is still uncovered no matter how long beautifull hair has.
And if a woman preach or teaches at Church she not anemore covered..

I dont get it. The Bible teaches that the hair is given for a covering. this veil doctrine is false doctrine.

[Esaias]

I dont get it. The Bible teaches that the hair is given for a covering. this veil doctrine is false doctrine.

Are you open to the possibility you may be wrong?

Please explain this:

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. 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 11:5-6)


If the covering is the hair, then being shorn or shaven is to be uncovered. Yet Paul said if a woman is uncovered it is AS IF she were shaven, and that if she won't be covered she should ALSO be shorn.

So then, does the Scripture say this:

Every woman praying or prophesying with her hair cut off dishonours her head, because that is the same as if she had her hair cut off. For if the woman has no hair, let her also have her hair be cut off.

????

[Apostolic1ness]

Are you open to the possibility you may be wrong?

Please explain this:

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. 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 11:5-6)


If the covering is the hair, then being shorn or shaven is to be uncovered. Yet Paul said if a woman is uncovered it is AS IF she were shaven, and that if she won't be covered she should ALSO be shorn.

So then, does the Scripture say this:

Every woman praying or prophesying with her hair cut off dishonours her head, because that is the same as if she had her hair cut off. For if the woman has no hair, let her also have her hair be cut off.

????

you missed one 1 Corinthians 11:15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering. the covering that Paul is speaking of the entire time is the hair.

[Esaias]

you missed one 1 Corinthians 11:15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering. the covering that Paul is speaking of the entire time is the hair.

So then you agree, that if a woman have no hair she is to cut her hair, because having no hair is all one as if she had no hair?

[houston]

So then you agree, that if a woman have no hair she is to cut her hair, because having no hair is all one as if she had no hair?

Funny

[Apostolic1ness]

So then you agree, that if a woman have no hair she is to cut her hair, because having no hair is all one as if she had no hair?

so according to you 1cor 11:6... but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. means? what is her covering?
next verse 7 For a man ought not to cover his head.... means to you a hat,scarf or long hair?

[Esaias]

so according to you 1cor 11:6... but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. means? what is her covering?
next verse 7 For a man ought not to cover his head.... means to you a hat,scarf or long hair?

I believe that a woman ought to have her head covered when praying or prophesying, and if she won't then she might as well have her hair cut off, because both are dishonourable.

And, men ought NOT to have their head covered when praying or prophesying because that is likewise dishonourable. I also believe that NATURE TEACHES US a lesson that supports the apostle's instructions: if a man have long hair it is a shame but if a woman has long hair it is glorious. The lesson from nature is a support to the instruction of the apostle.

So men ought to have short hair, and ought to be uncovered when praying or prophesying (ie when worshipping), and women ought to have long hair and ought to be covered when praying or prophesying. And, if a woman will not be covered, then she ought to ALSO (in addition, in addition to not being covered) have her hair cut off.

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. 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 11:5-6)

[Apostolic1ness]

I believe that a woman ought to have her head covered when praying or prophesying, and if she won't then she might as well have her hair cut off, because both are dishonourable.

And, men ought NOT to have their head covered when praying or prophesying because that is likewise dishonourable. I also believe that NATURE TEACHES US a lesson that supports the apostle's instructions: if a man have long hair it is a shame but if a woman has long hair it is glorious. The lesson from nature is a support to the instruction of the apostle.

So men ought to have short hair, and ought to be uncovered when praying or prophesying (ie when worshipping), and women ought to have long hair and ought to be covered when praying or prophesying. And, if a woman will not be covered, then she ought to ALSO (in addition, in addition to not being covered) have her hair cut off.

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. 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 11:5-6)
so in addition to long hair which the scripture says is given for a covering you want another type of covering on the women. is that correct?

[Esaias]

This is also indicated in the old testament.

For women, it was a shame to have their headcovering removed:

Take the millstones, and grind meal: uncover thy locks, make bare the leg, uncover the thigh, pass over the rivers. Thy nakedness shall be uncovered, yea, thy shame shall be seen: I will take vengeance, and I will not meet thee as a man.
(Isaiah 47:2-3)

Under the old covenant, the glory of God was covered:

But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away: How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory. For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth. For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious. Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech: And not as Moses, which put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished: But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ. But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart. Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away. Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.
(2 Corinthians 3:7-18)

To reflect this truth, the priest had to have their heads covered when ministering:

And thou shalt make holy garments for Aaron thy brother for glory and for beauty. And thou shalt speak unto all that are wise hearted, whom I have filled with the spirit of wisdom, that they may make Aaron's garments to consecrate him, that he may minister unto me in the priest's office. And these are the garments which they shall make; a breastplate, and an ephod, and a robe, and a broidered coat, a mitre, and a girdle: and they shall make holy garments for Aaron thy brother, and his sons, that he may minister unto me in the priest's office. ... And thou shalt make a plate of pure gold, and grave upon it, like the engravings of a signet, HOLINESS TO THE LORD. And thou shalt put it on a blue lace, that it may be upon the mitre; upon the forefront of the mitre it shall be. And it shall be upon Aaron's forehead, that Aaron may bear the iniquity of the holy things, which the children of Israel shall hallow in all their holy gifts; and it shall be always upon his forehead, that they may be accepted before the LORD. And thou shalt embroider the coat of fine linen, and thou shalt make the mitre of fine linen, and thou shalt make the girdle of needlework. And for Aaron's sons thou shalt make coats, and thou shalt make for them girdles, and bonnets shalt thou make for them, for glory and for beauty. And thou shalt put them upon Aaron thy brother, and his sons with him; and shalt anoint them, and consecrate them, and sanctify them, that they may minister unto me in the priest's office. And thou shalt make them linen breeches to cover their nakedness; from the loins even unto the thighs they shall reach: And they shall be upon Aaron, and upon his sons, when they come in unto the tabernacle of the congregation, or when they come near unto the altar to minister in the holy place; that they bear not iniquity, and die: it shall be a statute for ever unto him and his seed after him.
(Exodus 28:2-43)

So the priests had to have their heads covered under the old covenant worship system. This reflects the truth that God's glory was concealed under the old covenant, but being now revealed under the new covenant, the head is to be UNCOVERED:

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. Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.
(1 Corinthians 11:3-4)

Under the old covenant, Christ (the visible image of the invisible God, the express brightness of God's glory) was concealed. But under the new covenant, that glory is on display. The head covering issue illustrates this truth during worship. The man is the glory and image of God, and thus is a picture of Christ, and thus is to be uncovered. The woman is the glory of the man, and thus represent's "man's glory" which is of course to be covered up in the presence of God and the holy angels:

For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.
(1 Corinthians 11:10)

The Christian woman's head covering is the token of the proper authority being obeyed in the church, namely that God's Divine Order is being acknowledged and followed.

So where does the hair come into all this?

Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered? Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.
(1 Corinthians 11:13-15)

First of all, there is a lesson from nature. This is a natural lesson, a lesson taught in the natural, which illustrates and supports and shed's light on and helps us to visualise the propriety and truth of the apostle's teaching. Nature teaches us that a man having long hair is shameful, but it is glorious for a woman to have long hair. This can be proven very easily (at least as far as women are concerned) by the fact that whenever a woman has long, flowing hair other women tend to admire her hair and declare how beautiful it is.

So what is the lesson? In the natural, for a man to have hair like a woman, which resembles a head covering or veil, is shameful, whereas it is appropriate for a woman. In the natural, a woman's hair is given her for "a covering". But we need to make note of what kind of "covering" - it is a peribolaion, what in English we would call a shawl or mantle. It means "something thrown around" like a wrap. The peribolaion was an article of clothing wrapped around the body. Sometimes it would be also draped over the head (just like shawls are today). The long hair is given to the woman as something to wrap around her and cover her. And in the natural, this is good and beautiful for a woman, but not so for a man.

The key is to note that this is IN THE NATURAL, and is brought up by the apostle specifically to SUPPORT a teaching he has concerning head covering. It cannot be taken to mean that a woman having long hair SUPPLANTS or REPLACES her head being covered as taught by Paul in the first part of his teaching in chapter 11, because that creates a CONTRADICTION.

Paul says if a woman is uncovered, it is AS IF she were shaven (had short or no hair). He says if the woman doesn't want to be covered, then she ought to ALSO (in addition) be shorn (have her hair cut short or off). This clearly proves the covering in the first part of the chapter is IN ADDITION to hair, and cannot itself be the hair. Otherwise, Paul would be saying if a woman had her hair cut off it is AS IF she had her hair cut off, and if she has her hair cut off she ought to ALSO have her hair cut off!

Furthermore, we can see historically that everyone throughout all time until the mid to late 1800s understood 1 Corinthians ch 11 to be teaching that women ought to be wearing a head covering of some kind during worship, and that men ought NOT to be doing the same. It was only with the rise of modernism, the feminist movement ("Suffragettes" and others), and liberalism that other interpretations came into vogue (such as "Paul's instructions were only relevant to 1st century Corinth", or "the hair is itself the covering commanded"). Today, most American and western European "Christians" ignore this teaching, or substitute hair (or in some cases wedding rings!) in place of the head covering. It is interesting, though, that practically EVERY WHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD (with the exception of China) all sects o fChristendom, including apostolics, maintain the ancient and historical understanding of Paul's teaching. Only recently, in western societies (and communist countries like China which has created a largely unisex culture), have Christians departed from the biblical and historical norm.

But not entirely, for in most churches in America it is (or at least was) the norm for the men to at least remove any head coverings they might have when they come to church. This is a vestige of the ancient practice that many still continue without a clue as to why.

[houston]

Well stated, Essayas.

[Esaias]

Well stated, Essayas.

Well, I do try.

:highfive

[Michael The Disciple]

Today, most American and western European "Christians" ignore this teaching, or substitute hair (or in some cases wedding rings!) in place of the head covering. It is interesting, though, that practically EVERY WHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD (with the exception of China) all sects o fChristendom, including apostolics, maintain the ancient and historical understanding of Paul's teaching. Only recently, in western societies (and communist countries like China which has created a largely unisex culture), have Christians departed from the biblical and historical norm.

Also among the "Black Apostolics" many of them still practice the headcovering!

Oops I was thinking this was a different thread. It would be obvious in a thread about Gino that Black Churches cover!

[peter83]

I dont get it. The Bible teaches that the hair is given for a covering. this veil doctrine is false doctrine.

Dont be so fast to protect your religious rights...
1)take a dictionary and you will see that is a totaly diferent word used Paul to describe the natural covering (perivoleon =something put around) and the veil (katakalima=something put up to the head for hide something).
2) Did Paul wanted women to prophesy and prey with long hair and aftwer that puy it away? How a woman with long hair could be uncovered during prayer then?
3) Does it makes since to you? " 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.
According to the long hair interpatetion must read "For if the woman be not with long hair,let her also be shorn:but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven ,;et her has long hair'? :)
search it and question your self (not your faith) you self. Is my religion the only one right? Or just a one more denomination in the Church of Christ?
Peace.

[1ofthechosen]

Dont be so fast to protect your religious rights...
1)take a dictionary and you will see that is a totaly diferent word used Paul to describe the natural covering (perivoleon =something put around) and the veil (katakalima=something put up to the head for hide something).
2) Did Paul wanted women to prophesy and prey with long hair and aftwer that puy it away? How a woman with long hair could be uncovered during prayer then?
3) Does it makes since to you? " 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.
According to the long hair interpatetion must read "For if the woman be not with long hair,let her also be shorn:but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven ,;et her has long hair'? :)
search it and question your self (not your faith) you self. Is my religion the only one right? Or just a one more denomination in the Church of Christ?
Peace.

We're definitely not one more denomination in the Church of Christ. There is absolutely no denominations in the Church of Christ. And not the people who call their self church of Christ either!

I believe hair is important, but the differences in salvation methods, and even who God is whether He is one or 3 makes a distinction that can't be rectified. If you are worshipping multiplicities of diety that's a pantheon. We are monotheistic, and we are Baptized in His name, we are part of His named people. We have His Holy Spirit with the evidence of speaking in His language, as His Spirit gives the utterance. And we are washed and cleaned in His blood. We are the only people in the world who truly follow Matthew 28:19. And apart from Acts 2:38 there is no other way to be saved. And there is no other name given amongst men under heaven by which you must be saved.

These my friend are unreconcilable differences. All I can say is you didn't end up here on accident, you are here for one or two purposes. Either God led you here, or Satan. All I can say is there is not many ways to Jesus only one. And anything not going to Jesus you are giving to Satan. That's all he wants to do is divert worship, so it doesn't go in the right place. Don't be deceived!

[peter83]

These my friend are unreconcilable differences. All I can say is you didn't end up here on accident, you are here for one or two purposes. Either God led you here, or Satan. All I can say is there is not many ways to Jesus only one. And anything not going to Jesus you are giving to Satan. That's all he wants to do is divert worship, so it doesn't go in the right place. Don't be deceived!

Sorry what makes you believe Satan drive me here? I am not a oneness Christian or what? Please explain what makes you think i am decieved.
My commnet was about woman head coverings. If you dont afree thats ok but that means i am deiceved ad drivn from Satan? please explain...

[Amanah]

Sorry what makes you believe Satan drive me here? I am not a oneness Christian or what? Please explain what makes you think i am decieved.
My commnet was about woman head coverings. If you dont afree thats ok but that means i am deiceved ad drivn from Satan? please explain...

Brother, I don't think he meant it the way it seemed, we appreciate you being here.

[1ofthechosen]

Sorry what makes you believe Satan drive me here? I am not a oneness Christian or what? Please explain what makes you think i am decieved.
My commnet was about woman head coverings. If you dont afree thats ok but that means i am deiceved ad drivn from Satan? please explain...

What I said has nothing to do with head coverings, but this statement:
You said "search it and question your self (not your faith) you self. Is my religion the only one right? Or just a one more denomination in the Church of Christ?"

We are not Protestants nor a denomination, I'm saying your in the valley of decision. Are you going to come to the truth, or stay doing the same thing? Don't be deceived all things said to be chrisitan are the body of Christ. The plan of salvation, is a great foundational truth, if your messed up there the rest will be to!

I didn't say Satan sent you here I said you were here for only 2 reasons, either God or Satan sent you here. Don't get up tight buddy that's everyone who is here, or will ever come here!

[peter83]

Brother, I don't think he meant it the way it seemed, we appreciate you being here.

Ι hope too sister.
My english are bad but i can not get why he told me such things...3 gods-deceived etc...maby he confused me with somebody else..
Thank you :)God bless you :)

[Apostolic1ness]

This is also indicated in the old testament.

For women, it was a shame to have their headcovering removed:

Take the millstones, and grind meal: uncover thy locks, make bare the leg, uncover the thigh, pass over the rivers. Thy nakedness shall be uncovered, yea, thy shame shall be seen: I will take vengeance, and I will not meet thee as a man.
(Isaiah 47:2-3)

Under the old covenant, the glory of God was covered:

But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away: How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory. For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth. For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious. Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech: And not as Moses, which put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished: But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ. But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart. Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away. Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.
(2 Corinthians 3:7-18)

To reflect this truth, the priest had to have their heads covered when ministering:

And thou shalt make holy garments for Aaron thy brother for glory and for beauty. And thou shalt speak unto all that are wise hearted, whom I have filled with the spirit of wisdom, that they may make Aaron's garments to consecrate him, that he may minister unto me in the priest's office. And these are the garments which they shall make; a breastplate, and an ephod, and a robe, and a broidered coat, a mitre, and a girdle: and they shall make holy garments for Aaron thy brother, and his sons, that he may minister unto me in the priest's office. ... And thou shalt make a plate of pure gold, and grave upon it, like the engravings of a signet, HOLINESS TO THE LORD. And thou shalt put it on a blue lace, that it may be upon the mitre; upon the forefront of the mitre it shall be. And it shall be upon Aaron's forehead, that Aaron may bear the iniquity of the holy things, which the children of Israel shall hallow in all their holy gifts; and it shall be always upon his forehead, that they may be accepted before the LORD. And thou shalt embroider the coat of fine linen, and thou shalt make the mitre of fine linen, and thou shalt make the girdle of needlework. And for Aaron's sons thou shalt make coats, and thou shalt make for them girdles, and bonnets shalt thou make for them, for glory and for beauty. And thou shalt put them upon Aaron thy brother, and his sons with him; and shalt anoint them, and consecrate them, and sanctify them, that they may minister unto me in the priest's office. And thou shalt make them linen breeches to cover their nakedness; from the loins even unto the thighs they shall reach: And they shall be upon Aaron, and upon his sons, when they come in unto the tabernacle of the congregation, or when they come near unto the altar to minister in the holy place; that they bear not iniquity, and die: it shall be a statute for ever unto him and his seed after him.
(Exodus 28:2-43)

So the priests had to have their heads covered under the old covenant worship system. This reflects the truth that God's glory was concealed under the old covenant, but being now revealed under the new covenant, the head is to be UNCOVERED:

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. Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.
(1 Corinthians 11:3-4)

Under the old covenant, Christ (the visible image of the invisible God, the express brightness of God's glory) was concealed. But under the new covenant, that glory is on display. The head covering issue illustrates this truth during worship. The man is the glory and image of God, and thus is a picture of Christ, and thus is to be uncovered. The woman is the glory of the man, and thus represent's "man's glory" which is of course to be covered up in the presence of God and the holy angels:

For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.
(1 Corinthians 11:10)

The Christian woman's head covering is the token of the proper authority being obeyed in the church, namely that God's Divine Order is being acknowledged and followed.

So where does the hair come into all this?

Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered? Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.
(1 Corinthians 11:13-15)

First of all, there is a lesson from nature. This is a natural lesson, a lesson taught in the natural, which illustrates and supports and shed's light on and helps us to visualise the propriety and truth of the apostle's teaching. Nature teaches us that a man having long hair is shameful, but it is glorious for a woman to have long hair. This can be proven very easily (at least as far as women are concerned) by the fact that whenever a woman has long, flowing hair other women tend to admire her hair and declare how beautiful it is.

So what is the lesson? In the natural, for a man to have hair like a woman, which resembles a head covering or veil, is shameful, whereas it is appropriate for a woman. In the natural, a woman's hair is given her for "a covering". But we need to make note of what kind of "covering" - it is a peribolaion, what in English we would call a shawl or mantle. It means "something thrown around" like a wrap. The peribolaion was an article of clothing wrapped around the body. Sometimes it would be also draped over the head (just like shawls are today). The long hair is given to the woman as something to wrap around her and cover her. And in the natural, this is good and beautiful for a woman, but not so for a man.

The key is to note that this is IN THE NATURAL, and is brought up by the apostle specifically to SUPPORT a teaching he has concerning head covering. It cannot be taken to mean that a woman having long hair SUPPLANTS or REPLACES her head being covered as taught by Paul in the first part of his teaching in chapter 11, because that creates a CONTRADICTION.

Paul says if a woman is uncovered, it is AS IF she were shaven (had short or no hair). He says if the woman doesn't want to be covered, then she ought to ALSO (in addition) be shorn (have her hair cut short or off). This clearly proves the covering in the first part of the chapter is IN ADDITION to hair, and cannot itself be the hair. Otherwise, Paul would be saying if a woman had her hair cut off it is AS IF she had her hair cut off, and if she has her hair cut off she ought to ALSO have her hair cut off!

Furthermore, we can see historically that everyone throughout all time until the mid to late 1800s understood 1 Corinthians ch 11 to be teaching that women ought to be wearing a head covering of some kind during worship, and that men ought NOT to be doing the same. It was only with the rise of modernism, the feminist movement ("Suffragettes" and others), and liberalism that other interpretations came into vogue (such as "Paul's instructions were only relevant to 1st century Corinth", or "the hair is itself the covering commanded"). Today, most American and western European "Christians" ignore this teaching, or substitute hair (or in some cases wedding rings!) in place of the head covering. It is interesting, though, that practically EVERY WHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD (with the exception of China) all sects o fChristendom, including apostolics, maintain the ancient and historical understanding of Paul's teaching. Only recently, in western societies (and communist countries like China which has created a largely unisex culture), have Christians departed from the biblical and historical norm.

But not entirely, for in most churches in America it is (or at least was) the norm for the men to at least remove any head coverings they might have when they come to church. This is a vestige of the ancient practice that many still continue without a clue as to why.

so let me fully understand you.

you do believe that a woman should put on a second covering? You do not

believe Paul is teaching the hair is that covering?

Do you personally teach women to wear a second covering?

[peter83]

I'm saying your in the valley of decision. Are you going to come to the truth, or stay doing the same thing? Don't be deceived all things said to be chrisitan are the body of Christ. The plan of salvation, is a great foundational truth, if your messed up there the rest will be to!

Thank for your interest ,but what nakes you believe (or better know) that i am not in the truth?
And where you think i am standing and you think i "will stay doing the same thing'?
Please explain because your words are heavy ....and unexpected :)

[peter83]

so let me fully understand you.

you do believe that a woman should put on a second covering? You do not

believe Paul is teaching the hair is that covering?

Do you personally teach women to wear a second covering?

Hews use a cover ,even until today. Women and men
Oaul was speaking about that and he says that men have to no cover them selfs but women must continue do that.
The katakalima is something they put in the head in prayer time.
The perivoleon is the natural all day covering for a woman.
Read the interlinear text to understand the difference.
A man has to have short hair and not anymore wear a jewish coverin. But women like nature have them covering them selfs with long hair they must continue (like Jews today too!) wear a covering while pray etc.
Read it and i think dictionary will help you understand the problematic translation of those two words :)
God bless you! :)

[1ofthechosen]

[QUOTE=1ofthechosen;1531000] I'm saying your in the valley of decision. Are you going to come to the truth, or stay doing the same thing? Don't be deceived all things said to be chrisitan are the body of Christ. The plan of salvation, is a great foundational truth, if your messed up there the rest will be to!

Thank for your interest ,but what nakes you believe (or better know) that i am not in the truth?
And where you think i am standing and you think i "will stay doing the same thing'?
Please explain because your words are heavy ....and unexpected :)

All I'm saying is there is one way to Jesus not many. If you are believing all Christianity is the same, that's deception.

It has nothing to do with you, but just your statement. Which it's funny how both times you worked around everything else I said that gave these statements their context. You can't even understand these things I said without the other chunk.

Let me ask you a question do you believe in the trinity? Let's start there. I don't want to offend you.

[Apostolic1ness]

Hews use a cover ,even until today. Women and men
Oaul was speaking about that and he says that men have to no cover them selfs but women must continue do that.
The katakalima is something they put in the head in prayer time.
The perivoleon is the natural all day covering for a woman.
Read the interlinear text to understand the difference.
A man has to have short hair and not anymore wear a jewish coverin. But women like nature have them covering them selfs with long hair they must continue (like Jews today too!) wear a covering while pray etc.
Read it and i think dictionary will help you understand the problematic translation of those two words :)
God bless you! :)

so do you personally teach women to use a second covering?

not seeing your point of view, the scripture clearly states that Hair is giver for a woman's covering. No mention of another type of covering but specifically says HAIR IS GIVEN HER FOR A COVERING.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Hews use a cover ,even until today. Women and men
Oaul was speaking about that and he says that men have to no cover them selfs but women must continue do that.
The katakalima is something they put in the head in prayer time.
The perivoleon is the natural all day covering for a woman.
Read the interlinear text to understand the difference.
A man has to have short hair and not anymore wear a jewish coverin. But women like nature have them covering them selfs with long hair they must continue (like Jews today too!) wear a covering while pray etc.
Read it and i think dictionary will help you understand the problematic translation of those two words :)
God bless you! :)

What's a Hew?

[peter83]

What's a Hew?

Jews :heeheehee

[Evang.Benincasa]

Jews :heeheehee

Oh

[peter83]

so do you personally teach women to use a second covering?

not seeing your point of view, the scripture clearly states that Hair is giver for a woman's covering. No mention of another type of covering but specifically says HAIR IS GIVEN HER FOR A COVERING.

Yes i told you and i will say to you again , search a verse by verse interlinear text to see the diference between the two words used . English translators translate as covering the two words and that is why the confusing.
But out of it there are many English people too that they understand it correctly! That is the Spirit language that we all have the same :).
Again is pointless speak for something that you dont want to examine it . Search it and also try to read it with the way i told you before and see that long hair does not make any sense.

I dont teach nothin :) Woman needs her long hair always because is her vesture.
περιβόλαιον peribolaion (pe-riy-ɓo'-lai-on) n.
something thrown around one, i.e. a mantle, veil.
[
KJV: covering, vesture

But during prayer she needs to hide her head.
κατακαλύπτω katakalupto (ka-ta-ka-lïp'-tō) v.
to cover wholly, i.e. veil.
[from G2596 and G2572]
KJV: cover, hide

[Evang.Benincasa]

Yes i told you and i will say to you again , search a verse by verse interlinear text to see the diference between the two words used . English translators translate as covering the two words and that is why the confusing.
But out of it there are many English people too that they understand it correctly! That is the Spirit language that we all have the same :).
Again is pointless speak for something that you dont want to examine it . Search it and also try to read it with the way i told you before and see that long hair does not make any sense.

I dont teach nothin :) Woman needs her long hair always because is her vesture.
περιβόλαιον peribolaion (pe-riy-ɓo'-lai-on) n.
something thrown around one, i.e. a mantle, veil.
[
KJV: covering, vesture

But during prayer she needs to hide her head.
κατακαλύπτω katakalupto (ka-ta-ka-lïp'-tō) v.
to cover wholly, i.e. veil.
[from G2596 and G2572]
KJV: cover, hide

Your γιαγιά would be proud. :heeheehee

[peter83]

Your γιαγιά would be proud. :heeheehee

hahahaha she died when i was on drugs....but i dont know if she would rere happy because she was Old Calendar Orthodox....you know :)

[Apostolic1ness]

Yes i told you and i will say to you again , search a verse by verse interlinear text to see the diference between the two words used . English translators translate as covering the two words and that is why the confusing.
But out of it there are many English people too that they understand it correctly! That is the Spirit language that we all have the same :).
Again is pointless speak for something that you dont want to examine it . Search it and also try to read it with the way i told you before and see that long hair does not make any sense.

I dont teach nothin :) Woman needs her long hair always because is her vesture.
περιβόλαιον peribolaion (pe-riy-ɓo'-lai-on) n.
something thrown around one, i.e. a mantle, veil.
[
KJV: covering, vesture

But during prayer she needs to hide her head.
κατακαλύπτω katakalupto (ka-ta-ka-lïp'-tō) v.
to cover wholly, i.e. veil.
[from G2596 and G2572]
KJV: cover, hide

Look at the text any way you desire upside down vertically and inside out. The text does not provide that there is another covering besides the hair.
The text defines the covering as the hair. There is simply way around it.

so why dont you teach it?

[peter83]

Look at the text any way you desire upside down vertically and inside out. The text does not provide that there is another covering besides the hair.
The text defines the covering as the hair. There is simply way around it.

so why dont you teach it?

First i am not a teacher , second did you read what i said to you? it is very simple . I am 99% right. if you dont understand it "16 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God."
God will reveal to you if you want to!
But please read what i writed to you man. i write you from the dictionary too! I have and read the original text and they are two diferend words ,please go back and check it for your self boy :)

[Apostolic1ness]

First i am not a teacher , second did you read what i said to you? it is very simple . I am 99% right. if you dont understand it "16 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God."
God will reveal to you if you want to!
But please read what i writed to you man. i write you from the dictionary too! I have and read the original text and they are two diferend words ,please go back and check it for your self boy :)

the one percent that you are wrong on is the second covering.
simply not provided by the text.
no need to get upset "check it for yourself boy" who says this kind of stuff?

[peter83]

the one percent that you are wrong on is the second covering.
simply not provided by the text.
no need to get upset "check it for yourself boy" who says this kind of stuff?

Please! did you check what i writed?
Look
THis word is used in the last verse about hair : περιβόλαιον peribolaion (pe-riy-ɓo'-lai-on) n.
something thrown around one, i.e. a mantle, veil.
[
KJV: covering, vesture

and this church is used about veil.
κατακαλύπτω katakalupto (ka-ta-ka-lïp'-tō) v.
to cover wholly, i.e. veil.
KJV: cover, hide

Hair are "something thrown around' and veil is "something to cover (hide) holly)
Many Americans too practice this and is a Jewish practice until now.
Paul writed this because men and women used coverings like Jesws always did and do!
Now tell me how you interpet this verse :
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.
According to you covering is hair so we must read it like:
"For if the woman does not have long hair,let her cut her hair too, but if it be a shame for a woman to cut her hair let her have long hair'?
Does this makes any sense my dear brother?

[peter83]

the one percent that you are wrong on is the second covering.
simply not provided by the text.
no need to get upset "check it for yourself boy" who says this kind of stuff?

This will help you :
verse 4 every man praying or prophesying anything on his head having dishonours his head
That is covering ,something you put (whatever, hat,veil) on your head.

[Apostolic1ness]

Please! did you check what i writed?
Look
THis word is used in the last verse about hair : περιβόλαιον peribolaion (pe-riy-ɓo'-lai-on) n.
something thrown around one, i.e. a mantle, veil.
[
KJV: covering, vesture

and this church is used about veil.
κατακαλύπτω katakalupto (ka-ta-ka-lïp'-tō) v.
to cover wholly, i.e. veil.
KJV: cover, hide

Hair are "something thrown around' and veil is "something to cover (hide) holly)
Many Americans too practice this and is a Jewish practice until now.
Paul writed this because men and women used coverings like Jesws always did and do!
Now tell me how you interpet this verse :
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.
According to you covering is hair so we must read it like:
"For if the woman does not have long hair,let her cut her hair too, but if it be a shame for a woman to cut her hair let her have long hair'?
Does this makes any sense my dear brother?

I read it several times. and what i see is this. The entire portion of scripture is talking about both uncut hair on women and cut hair on men also the meanings and when I see verses 13 through 15 it sums up to me that the covering of the woman is her hair. I just dont see the second covering since the definition is provided i verse 15.

[peter83]

I read it several times. and what i see is this. The entire portion of scripture is talking about both uncut hair on women and cut hair on men also the meanings and when I see verses 13 through 15 it sums up to me that the covering of the woman is her hair. I just dont see the second covering since the definition is provided i verse 15.

Yes read it according to your logic and tell me:
“For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn:”
or
'“For if the woman [has cut hair from her head], let her also [cut her hair]”
that does not nake any sense right?
Also i said to you the word used for covering is KATAKALIPTO and means icover totally something or hide!
In the last verse the word is diferent and speaks about hair , only that verse speaks about hair. and means "something to pyt around"
Now look that too:
4'every man praying or prophesying something anythiong on his head having" What a man could have put on his head? :)
Good night!

[peter83]

All I'm saying is there is one way to Jesus not many. If you are believing all Christianity is the same, that's deception.

It has nothing to do with you, but just your statement. Which it's funny how both times you worked around everything else I said that gave these statements their context. You can't even understand these things I said without the other chunk.

Let me ask you a question do you believe in the trinity? Let's start there. I don't want to offend you.

You misunderstand me.Sorry for that. I said that the Church of Jesus Christ is one.
So every denomination with their name "baptists" "jehoba witnesses" "pentecopstals" "apostolicsa" "evangelicals" etc can not be the one true Church and this can be revealed from how they call themselves.(and of doctrine)

I am baptized in Jesus name and with the Holy Spirit, i believe in one God and i am not trinitarian.
So i have to come to the truth or stay where i am? :)

[peter83]

http://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.gr/2016/09/christian-headcovering-is-identified.html

[Evang.Benincasa]

http://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.gr/2016/09/christian-headcovering-is-identified.html

Jerry Hayes the bank robber?

https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/201750/united-states-v-hayes/

Pentecostal minister – and bank robber – sentenced to jail for six-and-a-half years
Published May 6, 2004

BOSTON (RNS) An armed Pentecostal minister who threatened tellers at five New England banks and made off with more than $13,000 before police finally caught him will spend the next six-in-a-half years behind bars.

Jerry Hayes, 53, of Hartford, Maine, received his sentence April 8 in U.S. District Court in Boston. Hayes pleaded guilty in September to five counts involving robberies at banks in Massachusetts, Maine and New Hampshire.

Hayes, a Tennessee native with a track record of starting small churches, used the stolen money to make payments on a used car and a camper where he lived without plumbing or running water, according to Assistant U.S. Attorney John T. McNeil.

http://www.tciarchive.org/209.article

Now, this has nothing to do yea or nay concerning the Bible study which Peter posted. Just surprised to see Jerry still bishoping. Hey does he have a Bible study for his dog collar.? He has one for infant baptism.

[peter83]

Jerry Hayes the bank robber?

https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/201750/united-states-v-hayes/

Pentecostal minister – and bank robber – sentenced to jail for six-and-a-half years
Published May 6, 2004

BOSTON (RNS) An armed Pentecostal minister who threatened tellers at five New England banks and made off with more than $13,000 before police finally caught him will spend the next six-in-a-half years behind bars.

Jerry Hayes, 53, of Hartford, Maine, received his sentence April 8 in U.S. District Court in Boston. Hayes pleaded guilty in September to five counts involving robberies at banks in Massachusetts, Maine and New Hampshire.

Hayes, a Tennessee native with a track record of starting small churches, used the stolen money to make payments on a used car and a camper where he lived without plumbing or running water, according to Assistant U.S. Attorney John T. McNeil.

http://www.tciarchive.org/209.article

Now, this has nothing to do yea or nay concerning the Bible study which Peter posted. Just surprised to see Jerry still bishoping. Hey does he have a Bible study for his dog collar.? He has one for infant baptism.

lol :) i did not even read of him. I just wanted to give the Perivoleon-covering meaning :blush

[Evang.Benincasa]

lol :) i did not even read of him. I just wanted to give the Perivoleon-covering meaning :blush

No problem my brother. I have a debate book from when he stopped by one of our churches years ago. I totally understand you were looking for the subject of your discussion, not the personal hijinks of the "bishop" and his neo-Pentecostal Catholicism.

[peter83]

No problem my brother. I have a debate book from when he stopped by one of our churches years ago. I totally understand you were looking for the subject of your discussion, not the personal hijinks of the "bishop" and his neo-Pentecostal Catholicism.

Catholicism!!! wow people can go to far..:)
thank you brother

[Evang.Benincasa]

Catholicism!!! wow people can go to far..:)
thank you brother

Παρακαλώ :thumbsup

[Evang.Benincasa]

I just noticed that Jerry Hayes trademarked his name of Bishop David Ignatius™? He is a Metropolitan Archbishop!?!

Wow, it blows my mind how religion neatly creates a home for the insane.

[Apostolic1ness]

Yes read it according to your logic and tell me:
“For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn:”
or
'“For if the woman [has cut hair from her head], let her also [cut her hair]”
that does not nake any sense right?
Also i said to you the word used for covering is KATAKALIPTO and means icover totally something or hide!
In the last verse the word is diferent and speaks about hair , only that verse speaks about hair. and means "something to pyt around"
Now look that too:
4'every man praying or prophesying something anythiong on his head having" What a man could have put on his head? :)
Good night!

seems to me that verse 4 is stating for a man not to cover his head.
verse 14 says it is a shame for a man to have long hair.
verse 15 says hair is a covering.

so dont grow your hair long if your a man because it will be a covering.
so do grow your hair long if your a woman because it will be a covering.

try not to get so upset.

[Evang.Benincasa]

seems to me that verse 4 is stating for a man not to cover his head.
verse 14 says it is a shame for a man to have long hair.
verse 15 says hair is a covering.

so dont grow your hair long if your a man because it will be a covering.
so do grow your hair long if your a woman because it will be a covering.

try not to get so upset.

Petros is not getting upset when he states "good night" Καληνύχτα. :)

He is in Greece and it is 12:24 midnight. :)

[Apostolic1ness]

Petros is not getting upset when he states "good night" Καληνύχτα. :)

He is in Greece and it is 12:24 midnight. :)
Oh thanks for the info. So how long have you been evangelizing?

[peter83]

try not to get so upset.

:highfive

[peter83]

seems to me that verse 4 is stating for a man not to cover his head.
verse 14 says it is a shame for a man to have long hair.
verse 15 says hair is a covering.

so dont grow your hair long if your a man because it will be a covering.
so do grow your hair long if your a woman because it will be a covering.

try not to get so upset.

Verse 14 use the word katakalima and means (totaly cover, so that no body can see you, hide the entire head)
verse 15 uses perivoleon and means (something throwing around,placed around)

so English uses the same word . But even USA churches understand that right and some Greek understand hair like you! :)