Submission? Or Power and Control?

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by houston

The woman has wanted to exercise control over man since the fall. Eve's desire for her husband was the desire to control him. (Whoops)

Hence,

1 Timothy 2:14,

...but the woman being deceived was in the transgression...

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by houston

The woman has wanted to exercise control over man since the fall. Eve's desire for her husband was the desire to control him. (Whoops)

You are correct.

That's why every Jezebel must have an Ahab.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Amanah

I wanted to start right off the bat with a picture

Emma would be proud.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by ILG

Wow, that's pretty vulgar. Women who cut their hair simply don't look like that. If you live in the dry desert in high heat, you might want to drive out a ways so you can cool down. That doesn't mean you have to drive to the Arctic.

Oh, the less I have on the cooler I am argument?

Come work construction down here in the burning hot in a short and t shirt with no hat. Good luck.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Esaias

UPC, living in your head, rent free, I see.

Bro, you hit the home run. The nail has been hit.

ILG's hobby, collecting UPC heads.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

For once in this forum history, I would love for someone to lay out sound Biblical points as to why ILG is wrong in her views or whether or not the authors are right or wrong in their views.

It is always so easy to throw out insults. Is there someone who has Biblical wisdom to respond intelligently to ILG on this issue - for once? Would that be too much to ask?

Sis, we have already done it. The forum is weighted down thick.
Jesus could preach it, and David could play his harp, and the haters are gonna hate. ILG has a Facebook page where she and her followers lick their wounds. Does she have people show up there when she is holding court? No, it is all jumping through hoops over here to refute a book? Last one was Brother Bernard? What's the name of ILG's forum? Reasons why I hate the UPCI? Wow.

[Aquila]

So, is the Paul was "covering" Paul was talking about a woman's long uncut hair, or is it an actual head covering? Because, I'd like to expand upon this if possible. Here's my understanding, provided as commentary to the text:

1 Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ.

Paul desires that they be imitators of himself as he follows the Lord.

2Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you.

Paul commends them for remembering his needs and maintaining the traditions (or ordinances) he taught to them.

3But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.

Here Paul is bringing up the primary issue, headship. Paul teaches the order of headship: Christ, husband, and then wife.

4Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head,

Here Paul states that if any man prays with his head covered or veiled (as the male temple prostitutes) he dishonors his “head” (meaning Jesus Christ).

5but every wife who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, since it is the same as if her head were shaven.

But every wife who prays or prophesies without her veil dishonors her “head” (or husband). This is because it is as shameful AS IF her head were shaven (punishment of public humiliation given to immoral women).

6For if a wife will not cover her head, then she should cut her hair short. But since it is disgraceful for a wife to cut off her hair or shave her head, let her cover her head.

If a wife will not wear her veil, then she should cut her hair short (as a form of self inflicted humiliation). But since it is so disgraceful to be put to public shame by having her hair shorn, she should simply wear her veil.

7For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man.

A man shouldn’t cover his head as a woman, since the man is the very image and glory of God. However, a wife is her husband’s glory (by bringing honor to him).

8For man was not made from woman, but woman from man.

Order of creation: Woman was made from man.

9Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.

Order of purpose: Man wasn’t created for the woman, but rather woman was created to be a mate and companion for man.

10That is why a wife ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.

Thus a woman’s modesty through the wearing of the veil serves as a symbol of her husband’s authority over her. The term “because of the angels” is widely debated. However, we know that a modestly adorned Christian woman prevents men from being influenced by seductive spirits (fallen angels) that would entice him to lust and adultery.

11Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man nor man of woman;

Mutual need: Both the husband and his wife need each other.

12for as woman was made from man, so man is now born of woman. And all things are from God.

Neither is greater than the other in value because men are born from women and this is by God’s design.

13Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a wife to pray to God with her head uncovered?

Paul asks the Corinthians to determine for themselves if a woman should pray to God while immodestly attired.

14Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears long hair it is a disgrace for him, 15but if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her for a covering.

Paul draws an example to strengthen his argument from nature stated that even human nature teaches that if a man wears long effeminate hair it is disgraceful. However, if a woman has long hair, it is considered beautiful and her glory. For long hair was given her by nature as a covering.

16 If anyone is inclined to be contentious, we have no such practice, nor do the churches of God.

Some would say that Paul is illustrating that while head covering was customary for the Corinthians, it isn't a church wide custom. Thus contention on the matter is rejected.

In Summary:

-Obviously the women weren't in submission, so Paul explains headship.

-What was the problem? They were not wearing their veils, thereby dishonoring their husbands.

-Paul tells them to be covered.

-Paul explains why headship exists.

-Paul explains that even nature agrees because it covered her with hair.

-Paul illustrates long hair is shameful on a man but is a womans beauty, or glory.

-Some say that Paul indicates that a woman wearing a head covering was proper for the Corinthians, but this isn't a mandated church wide practice.

It's all right there and is still practiced in old world churches in that culture today; and has been for almost two thousand years.

Why do we feel the need to draw from the occult (symbol and power of uncut hair and/or holy magic hair) to establish doctrine???

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Esaias

No, it's the head covering.



The wings of the cherubim on the mercy seat are not like most drawings we see, like this:



Rather, the mercy seat is more of a throne where God, the King, sits. As such, the cherubim wings are more likely to form the back and arm rests, like an actual throne, as in this:



Keeping in mind, though, the cherubim were NOT modern "angels" or "people with wings" but more like the winged lion-bulls found throughout the ancient near east:

Cherubim throne in ivory found at Megiddo:



Assyrian cherub statue:



So picture the ark as a throne with two large cherubim (bull-like figures with wings and human and lion characteristics) forming the seat part. The wings would form the back and armrests, or perhaps serve as a type of canopy, or both. Perhaps like this (side view, body more lion-like than ox-like, however, in this rendering):



In any event, the woman's head covering is said by Paul to be necessary to cover her head, which represents the glory of man:

7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.

Under the new covenant, God's glory is not to be covered, as it was under the old covenant. This is symbolized by the Christian man having his head uncovered when ministering, whereas the priest in the old covenant had his head covered (with a turban, or bonnet) - see Ex 28:40.

God's plan requires His glory be on display, and man's glory be covered. This is symbolized by the woman's head being covered, since she is "the glory of the man".

Under the old covenant, the law is covered or concealed by the mercy seat (the "atonement" or "covering"). The law written on stone tables represents the old covenant, which is subordinate to the new covenant. As the woman is subordinate to the man in the hierarchy of God's creation, the old covenant is subordinate to the new in the hierarchy of God's covenants. The woman is covered, as the stone tables were covered.

I am sure more correlations could be found if pressed, but to suggest the cherubim covering the mercy seat = divine power flowing through the women's head covering (or hair, if you believe that way) seems extremely forced and unnatural.

Paul taught on head covering and nowhere gave the idea that covering = special abilities or special favours. The most that can be said is obedience to God brings favor, and disobedience brings corrective chastisement. But that is true of anything.

This was one of the most thought provoking posts I've read all week. Awesome post!

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Esaias

The wings of the cherubim on the mercy seat are not like most drawings we see, like this:



Rather, the mercy seat is more of a throne where God, the King, sits. As such, the cherubim wings are more likely to form the back and arm rests, like an actual throne, as in this:

Exod 25:17-22 "You shall make a mercy seat of pure gold; two and a half cubits shall be its length and a cubit and a half its width. And you shall make two cherubim of gold; of hammered work you shall make them at the two ends of the mercy seat. Make one cherub at one end, and the other cherub at the other end; you shall make the cherubim at the two ends of it of one piece with the mercy seat. And the cherubim shall stretch out their wings above, covering the mercy seat with their wings, and they shall face one another; the faces of the cherubim shall be toward the mercy seat.

[Amanah]

Originally Posted by Esaias

The cherubim guarded the way to the Tree of Life, and kept sinful man out. The cherubim on the mercy seat (throne of God) symbolically guarded the presence of God. The mercy seat itself covered the ten commandments on stone tables, thus shielding us from the curse of the law.

The woman is the glory of the man, and thus ought to be covered, whereas the man is the glory of God and ought not to be covered.

Hair is nature's lesson confirming that women ought to be covered and men uncovered when praying or prophesying. For, if a woman isn't going to be covered, then her hair ought to be cut short, which would be a shame. Therefore, let her be covered.

The woman ought to have exousia - a token or sign of authority - on her head, because of the messengers. The head covering serves as a sign that Divine Authority is in place and being followed in the assembly.

I'm not sure a connection between the cherubim and the head covering - much less the long hair - of a woman can be made???

Esaias -

some teach that "For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels," refers to angels that were in rebellion to God's order.

Jude 6 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.

and women are covered to show submission to authority, what are your thoughts?