Quote:
Originally Posted by pelathais
Bump...
Whatever your interpretations on 1 Corinthians 11 may be, the early church - for more than 1,000 years - understood Paul to be referring to a literal cloth type head covering.
From the catacombs - late 1st century or early 2nd century A.D. |
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfblume
Veils are custom, as 1 Cor 11:1 begins with Paul's words to follow his example, which is a carry-over from chapter 10 which speaks of not offending people with customs. What is divine is order of submission, not the symbol of the veil that shows it. My thoughts, anyway. |
Pelthais & Mblue,
Please read carefully and open-minded.
There's no indication within the Old Testament where women were required to utilize a veil during worship/prayer (see Deuteronomy). In
1st Corinthians 3:13 the Apostle Paul mentions Moses' (Greek:Kaluma), an actual veil. There's no other Greek word utilized within the New Testament specifically referring to only "veil." Therefore, we can't positively conclude that Paul's statement about a female's covering referred to an actual veil, in oppose to her hair.
Now, Mfblube and Pelthais, I would like to explore your ideology, that possibly Apostle Paul referred to an actual cloth as a head covering within the eleventh chapter of 1st Corinthians, as you claim this was a practice amongst the early church. Well allow me the opportunity to prove you wrong!
Read the following very carefully:
Peter 3:1 & 3
1) Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands.......
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;
Within the above scriptures Peter cautioned wives about glamorous hairdos, having hair intertwined with gold. In order to see a women's hair plated gold, their hair must be visible, in plain sight, thus rendering your ideology obsolete. If women were required to wear veils, such as you suggested, within the early church, Peter would have never commanded females to abstain from fancy hair styles.
Should I also mention that in the Old Testament, the high priest (a male) prayed while wearing his garment. Needless to say this garment had a hood attached, which the high priest wore on his head while praying, etc. Or should I also mention that Ezekiel prophesied while having his head covered (
Ezekiel 24:17)?
If Paul in fact was actually speaking of a "cloth" as a covering in
1 Corinthians 11:4, then Ezekiel, the high priest, and various others dishonored their head!
1 Corinthians 11:
4) Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.
Also notice
Romans 1:
27) And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly........
Romans states that nature teaches sexual relations are only between men and women (after marriage).
Now read what Paul states in
1 Corinthians 11
14) Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?
15) But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.
Regarding a covering, how natural is a cloth on a female or male's head? Remember, Paul referenced nature itself teaches us about this head "covering." Understanding veil (cloth) is nowhere near natural, the only natural reference Paul can address is hair and hair length, which is natural on a human being.
Threaded Mode
