And all this time i though He said " it is finished.." Seems to me Jesus' Resurrection was victory over death..
Seems to me according to how i understand what you have posted we should still have animal sacrifices Mat 5 :18
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
-
Depending upon the Holy Spirit for all you do?
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
-
-
How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
-
Bible Study should women wear head covering and men wear beards ? proof?
- Thread starter thesaintman
- Start date
Seems to me according to how i understand what you have posted we should still have animal sacrifices Mat 5 :18
Butch5
Member
Actually, I think it matters very much. Paul says that this covering should be worn because of the angels. Why because of the angels? What does the woman wearing the head covering have to do with the angels? I think we can get an idea from something else that Paul said to the Ephesians.
8 To me, who am less than the least of all the saints, this grace was given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ,
9 and to make all see what is the fellowship1 of the mystery, which from the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God who created all things through Jesus Christ2;
10 to the intent that now the manifold wisdom of God might be made known by the church to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places,
11 according to the eternal purpose which He accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord,
12 in whom we have boldness and access with confidence through faith in Him.
13 Therefore I ask that you do not lose heart at my tribulations for you, which is your glory. (Eph 3:8-13 NKJ)
Paul says, "by the Church." The word by is actually the Greek word "dia" and means through. He says that the manifold wisdom of God might be made known through the church to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places, that's the angels. God is using the Church to make known His wisdom to the angels and powers in heavenly places. So, when the church is not doing as it's supposed to it is sending the wrong message to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places. So, yes, I do think it really matters. I think it really, really, matters.
Butch5
Member
Picky? Paul's reasoning is the created order. Let me ask Reba, why do you seem to be so adamantly against this?
J
jocor
Guest
Of course it was victory over death. Are all the dead believers resurrected yet or will that happen in our future at the sound of the last trump to fulfill Torah?
You obviously do not understand what I have said. Did I not say he fulfilled burnt offerings, Passover lamb, sin offerings, etc. to the point that they do not need to be kept by believers?
AirDancer
Member
Head coverings were not historically worn all the time by women - or men, for that matter. Head coverings were used as a convenience when traveling ... part of the covering could be pulled across the nose & mouth to keep dust-free. During particular times of the year, when the winds were stronger, again, head coverings would be employed to reduce how much dust was inhaled.
Women were not to cut their hair off, which was something to differentiate them from those of the pagan temples as well as those from some African nations. (Many from African nations could not grow their hair long ... and many of these individuals were held as slaves.)
Over the centuries, head coverings were used as fashion statements. For many centuries, head coverings were used to contain lice and other critters from falling on faces, into foods; to keep heads warm at night; to identify social strata, etc.)
When our Lord God made clothing for Adam & Eve (after the fall), it is not specified that He also made head coverings for Eve. Further, in the time of Paul, there were certain classes of women who either shaved their heads or could not grow hair long. Paul's admonition was to remind women to not shave their hair off nor to emulate those who had no choice but to wear short hair.
Women were not to cut their hair off, which was something to differentiate them from those of the pagan temples as well as those from some African nations. (Many from African nations could not grow their hair long ... and many of these individuals were held as slaves.)
Over the centuries, head coverings were used as fashion statements. For many centuries, head coverings were used to contain lice and other critters from falling on faces, into foods; to keep heads warm at night; to identify social strata, etc.)
When our Lord God made clothing for Adam & Eve (after the fall), it is not specified that He also made head coverings for Eve. Further, in the time of Paul, there were certain classes of women who either shaved their heads or could not grow hair long. Paul's admonition was to remind women to not shave their hair off nor to emulate those who had no choice but to wear short hair.
I understood you clearly ..
Mat 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled
You posted this
The Scripture says this .. one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
The subtil changes to the Words of God began long ago...
dianegcook
Member
Maybe you should read Colossians.
1:16
For by Him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in the earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers, all things were created by Him, and for Him.
18; And He is the head of the body, the church, Who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He might have preeminence.
26, Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to His saints;
27; To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles;
WHICH IS CHRIST IN YOU, THE HOPE OF GLORY.
Butch5
Member
I'm sorry, I don't see what this has to do with the head covering.
dianegcook
Member
As the same from you, quoting, Eph.3:8-13. Lol
What has it to do with women covering their head with a scarf?
The mystery , Christ in you, the hope of glory.
Last edited:
Butch5
Member
Around the year 200 AD. Tertullian wrote work on this subject and gives evidence of how the Corinthian church understood the apostle Paul. There was a question as to whether the veiling was to be of married women or did it include virgins.
Chapter 8.—The Argument E Contrario.
The contraries, at all events, of all these (considerations) effect that a man is not to cover his head: to wit, because he has not by nature been gifted with excess of hair; because to be shaven or shorn is not shameful to him; because it was not on his account that the angels transgressed; because his Head is Christ. Accordingly, since the apostle is treating of man and woman—why the latter ought to be veiled, but the former not—it is apparent why he has been silent as to the virgin; allowing, to wit, the virgin to be understood in the woman by the self-same reason by which he forbore to name the boy as implied in the man; embracing the whole order of either sex in the names proper (to each) of woman and man. So likewise Adam, while still intact, is surnamed in Genesis man: “She shall be called,” says he, “woman, because she hath been taken from her own man.” Thus was Adam a man before nuptial intercourse, in like manner as Eve a woman. On either side the apostle has made his sentence apply with sufficient plainness to the universal species of each sex; and briefly and fully, with so well-appointed a definition, he says, “ Every woman.” What is “every,” but of every class, of every order, of every condition, of every dignity, of every age?—if, (as is the case), “every” means total and entire, and in none of its parts defective. But the virgin is withal a part of the woman. Equally, too, with regard to not veiling the man, he says “every.” Behold two diverse names, Man and woman—“every one” in each case: two laws, mutually distinctive; on the one hand (a law) of veiling, on the other (a law) of baring. Therefore, if the fact that it is said “every man” makes it plain that the name of man is common even to him who is not yet a man, a stripling male; (if), moreover, since the name is common according to nature, the law of not veiling him who among men is a virgin is common too according to discipline: why is it that it is not consequently prejudged that, woman being named, every woman-virgin is similarly comprised in the fellowship of the name, so as to be comprised too in the community of the law? If a virgin is not a woman, neither is a stripling a man. If the virgin is not covered on the plea that she is not a woman, let the stripling be covered on the plea that he is not a man. Let identity of virginity, share equality of indulgence. As virgins are not compelled to be veiled, so let boys not be bidden to be unveiled. Why do we partly acknowledge the definition of the apostle, as absolute with regard to “every man,” without entering upon disquisitions as to why he has not withal named the boy; but partly prevaricate, though it is equally absolute with regard to “every woman? ””If any,” he says, “is contentious, we have not such a custom, nor (has) the Church of God.” He shows that there had been some contention about this point; for the extinction whereof he uses the whole compendiousness (of language): not naming the virgin, on the one hand, in order to show that there is to be no doubt about her veiling; and, on the other hand, naming “every woman,” whereas he would have named the virgin (had the question been confined to her). So, too, did the Corinthians themselves understand him. In fact, at this day the Corinthians do veil their virgins. What the apostles taught, their disciples approve.
Early Church Fathers - – Ante-Nicene Fathers: The Writings of the Fathers Down To A.D. 325.
Note that the Corinthians veiled not only married women but also their virgins. Also take notice that Tertullian says that the apostles (plural) taught this
Chapter 8.—The Argument E Contrario.
The contraries, at all events, of all these (considerations) effect that a man is not to cover his head: to wit, because he has not by nature been gifted with excess of hair; because to be shaven or shorn is not shameful to him; because it was not on his account that the angels transgressed; because his Head is Christ. Accordingly, since the apostle is treating of man and woman—why the latter ought to be veiled, but the former not—it is apparent why he has been silent as to the virgin; allowing, to wit, the virgin to be understood in the woman by the self-same reason by which he forbore to name the boy as implied in the man; embracing the whole order of either sex in the names proper (to each) of woman and man. So likewise Adam, while still intact, is surnamed in Genesis man: “She shall be called,” says he, “woman, because she hath been taken from her own man.” Thus was Adam a man before nuptial intercourse, in like manner as Eve a woman. On either side the apostle has made his sentence apply with sufficient plainness to the universal species of each sex; and briefly and fully, with so well-appointed a definition, he says, “ Every woman.” What is “every,” but of every class, of every order, of every condition, of every dignity, of every age?—if, (as is the case), “every” means total and entire, and in none of its parts defective. But the virgin is withal a part of the woman. Equally, too, with regard to not veiling the man, he says “every.” Behold two diverse names, Man and woman—“every one” in each case: two laws, mutually distinctive; on the one hand (a law) of veiling, on the other (a law) of baring. Therefore, if the fact that it is said “every man” makes it plain that the name of man is common even to him who is not yet a man, a stripling male; (if), moreover, since the name is common according to nature, the law of not veiling him who among men is a virgin is common too according to discipline: why is it that it is not consequently prejudged that, woman being named, every woman-virgin is similarly comprised in the fellowship of the name, so as to be comprised too in the community of the law? If a virgin is not a woman, neither is a stripling a man. If the virgin is not covered on the plea that she is not a woman, let the stripling be covered on the plea that he is not a man. Let identity of virginity, share equality of indulgence. As virgins are not compelled to be veiled, so let boys not be bidden to be unveiled. Why do we partly acknowledge the definition of the apostle, as absolute with regard to “every man,” without entering upon disquisitions as to why he has not withal named the boy; but partly prevaricate, though it is equally absolute with regard to “every woman? ””If any,” he says, “is contentious, we have not such a custom, nor (has) the Church of God.” He shows that there had been some contention about this point; for the extinction whereof he uses the whole compendiousness (of language): not naming the virgin, on the one hand, in order to show that there is to be no doubt about her veiling; and, on the other hand, naming “every woman,” whereas he would have named the virgin (had the question been confined to her). So, too, did the Corinthians themselves understand him. In fact, at this day the Corinthians do veil their virgins. What the apostles taught, their disciples approve.
Early Church Fathers - – Ante-Nicene Fathers: The Writings of the Fathers Down To A.D. 325.
Note that the Corinthians veiled not only married women but also their virgins. Also take notice that Tertullian says that the apostles (plural) taught this
sojourner4Christ
Member
I don’t place any faith in opinions. What I’ve briefly posted here is researchable, demonstrable fact. If you want more doc’s, just ask.
Rounding the corners of the beard was done by those pagans of the ubiquitous sun-worshipping cults (e.g. the sun is also round), similar to the women baking round cakes for the queen of heaven (e.g. wedding cakes and communion wafers are traditionally round). And, of course, we're not to follow their ways.
The head covering passage goes back to the issue of headship/authority and the Nephilim (the Hebrew term for the Fallen Ones, referenced in Genesis 6 as the angelic sons of God who fell; they are scheduled to reappear in the end times. Jesus Christ's statement concerning the end times as prefigured in the episode of Noah implicates the Nephilim as active in world affairs.).
Some would say that the Nephilim topic is not a salvational issue but merely an interesting topic. Rather, Noah and the conditions prevalent at the time of the flood are absolutely KEY to prophecy. And what was the hallmark of Noah’s period? It was overrun with Nephilim. And, the hallmark of the period when Christ returns will also be the same, i.e. it will be overrun with Nephilim:
But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. (Mat. 24:37)
There are many other clues. For example, in Genesis 3:15, God pronounces that Eve's "seed" would crush the head of the serpent. Most Bible scholars generally regard this as the first Messianic prophecy in the Bible, in that we are told here that Satan's end will be at the hand of one of Eve's descendants -- i.e. a woman. Fast forward to the New Testament era, where it was widely known that the angels had once bred with the "daughters of men." Thus, the woman is told to have power (i.e. authority/headship) on her head because of the angels. IOW, it was widely known that the Nephilim found earthly women “attractive,” and thus folks feared a possible repeat episode of the Genesis 6 account. Hence, the men were rightly protective of their women, because of the angels.
For this cause [i.e. for fear of a repeat Nephilim episode] ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels. (1 Cor. 11:10)
It's far more than just an interesting topic. It will .become a salvational issue for many, as the whiz-bang "power and signs and lying wonders" (2 The. 2:9) of the enemy, upon release of his Nephilim from the bottomless pit, will undoubtedly deceive the majority.
This is why we have such a conditioning push today to accept genetic experimentation (and they would have us believe they've just now begun to debate cloning -- and cloning of sheep, no less!.). This is why so-called aliens (in their so-called UFO's) are always framed as experimenters via a sexual/reproduction theme. And this is why it is STILL important for (earthly) women to remain “under cover."
.
Rounding the corners of the beard was done by those pagans of the ubiquitous sun-worshipping cults (e.g. the sun is also round), similar to the women baking round cakes for the queen of heaven (e.g. wedding cakes and communion wafers are traditionally round). And, of course, we're not to follow their ways.
The head covering passage goes back to the issue of headship/authority and the Nephilim (the Hebrew term for the Fallen Ones, referenced in Genesis 6 as the angelic sons of God who fell; they are scheduled to reappear in the end times. Jesus Christ's statement concerning the end times as prefigured in the episode of Noah implicates the Nephilim as active in world affairs.).
Some would say that the Nephilim topic is not a salvational issue but merely an interesting topic. Rather, Noah and the conditions prevalent at the time of the flood are absolutely KEY to prophecy. And what was the hallmark of Noah’s period? It was overrun with Nephilim. And, the hallmark of the period when Christ returns will also be the same, i.e. it will be overrun with Nephilim:
But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. (Mat. 24:37)
There are many other clues. For example, in Genesis 3:15, God pronounces that Eve's "seed" would crush the head of the serpent. Most Bible scholars generally regard this as the first Messianic prophecy in the Bible, in that we are told here that Satan's end will be at the hand of one of Eve's descendants -- i.e. a woman. Fast forward to the New Testament era, where it was widely known that the angels had once bred with the "daughters of men." Thus, the woman is told to have power (i.e. authority/headship) on her head because of the angels. IOW, it was widely known that the Nephilim found earthly women “attractive,” and thus folks feared a possible repeat episode of the Genesis 6 account. Hence, the men were rightly protective of their women, because of the angels.
For this cause [i.e. for fear of a repeat Nephilim episode] ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels. (1 Cor. 11:10)
It's far more than just an interesting topic. It will .become a salvational issue for many, as the whiz-bang "power and signs and lying wonders" (2 The. 2:9) of the enemy, upon release of his Nephilim from the bottomless pit, will undoubtedly deceive the majority.
This is why we have such a conditioning push today to accept genetic experimentation (and they would have us believe they've just now begun to debate cloning -- and cloning of sheep, no less!.). This is why so-called aliens (in their so-called UFO's) are always framed as experimenters via a sexual/reproduction theme. And this is why it is STILL important for (earthly) women to remain “under cover."
.
Last edited:
Deborah13
Member
I don't believe this reference was to the Gentile learning Torah in the synagogues. The Gentiles had never received the law, but the Jewish converts had heard it preached all their lives in the synagogue and as long as they did mention Yeshua, they were fairly safe to keep going to the synagogues.
This is what most often happened, even to Jews, who professed, Yeshua as the Messiah. I highly doubt they would have tolerated a Gentile dog in their midst.
Joh 9:22 These things said his parents, because they were afraid of the Jews, for already had the Jews agreed together, that if any one may confess him--Christ, he may be put out of the synagogue;
Joh 9:23 because of this his parents said--`He is of age, ask him.'........
9:24-33
Joh 9:34 They answered and said to him, `In sins thou wast born altogether, and thou dost teach us!' and they cast him forth without.
How many synagogues did Paul get thrown out of and beaten by them, as well?
The author of Hebrews is clear about knowing the danger they were in and exhorted them not to turn back to the temple worship.
Butch5
Member
I explained it. Paul said that God was using the church to make known to the principalities and powers, which includes angels, in heavenly places His wisdom that had been hidden through the ages. So, when the church doesn't obey the Scriptures it is sending the wrong message to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places.
dianegcook
Member
dianegcook
Member
Yes, we should obey the scriptures.
But, people interpret the scriptures differently.
As the scriptures stated, there is no such custom, neither the church.
In my understanding of the scriptures ..seems to me mankind is wanting to replace the coverings given to me by God..with a piece of cloth. Something man made as if these are not enough..
Covered by His Blood
My husband
my hair.. earned every one of them grays..
Deborah13
Member
So you got me looking at two verses more closely than I have before when this subject has come up.
This is Young's Literal Translation of verse 15 and a particular word in that verse.
1Co 11:15 and a woman, if she have long hair, a glory it is to her, because the hair instead of a covering hath been given to her;
Instead of = G473
anti: over against, opposite, hence instead of, in comp. denotes contrast, requital, substitution, correspondence
Original Word: ἀντί
Part of Speech: Preposition
Transliteration: anti
Phonetic Spelling: (an-tee')
Short Definition: instead of, for
Definition: (a) instead of, in return for, over against, opposite, in exchange for, as a substitute for, (b) on my behalf, (c) wherefore, because.
http://biblehub.com/greek/473.htm
continued...
Deborah13
Member
Then I went back and reread the verses again, for the umteenth ....
1Co 11:11 but neither is a man apart from a woman, nor a woman apart from a man, in the Lord,
1Co 11:12 for as the woman is of the man, so also the man is through the woman, and the all things are of God.
1Co 11:13 In your own selves judge ye; is it seemly for a woman uncovered to pray to God?
1Co 11:14 doth not even nature itself teach you, that if a man indeed have long hair, a dishonour it is to him?
1Co 11:15 and a woman, if she have long hair, a glory it is to her, because the hair instead of a covering hath been given to her;
but = G4133
Original Word: πλήν
Part of Speech: Adverb
Transliteration: plén
Phonetic Spelling: (plane)
Short Definition: however, nevertheless
Definition: however, nevertheless, but, except that, yet.
imo
The word contentious tells us there was a dispute about whether women should be wearing head coverings.
Paul gives two sides of the argument, for and against. 'However/but' starts the other side and I believe Paul's view, because he ends it with verse 15.
Several months ago, I read a blog that belongs to an Orthodox Jewish wife, of a rabbi in Israel. She was saying that many of the women do not wear burkas but wear wigs over their hair. Some even wear them at home and only their husbands have ever seen their hair.
In Adam Clarke's commentary, I was reading tonight where a Jewish woman told how no one in her home had ever seen her hair. She kept it braided and covered all the time.
If this is about good or bad angels seeing a woman praying, well that would be anytime a woman prays, not just in church.
The church at Corinth had many Gentiles but there were Jews as well and I can see this easily being one of those things that Paul dealt with all the time. Like circumcision, feasts, etc., etc....
Just my thoughts...
1Co 11:11 but neither is a man apart from a woman, nor a woman apart from a man, in the Lord,
1Co 11:12 for as the woman is of the man, so also the man is through the woman, and the all things are of God.
1Co 11:13 In your own selves judge ye; is it seemly for a woman uncovered to pray to God?
1Co 11:14 doth not even nature itself teach you, that if a man indeed have long hair, a dishonour it is to him?
1Co 11:15 and a woman, if she have long hair, a glory it is to her, because the hair instead of a covering hath been given to her;
but = G4133
Original Word: πλήν
Part of Speech: Adverb
Transliteration: plén
Phonetic Spelling: (plane)
Short Definition: however, nevertheless
Definition: however, nevertheless, but, except that, yet.
imo
The word contentious tells us there was a dispute about whether women should be wearing head coverings.
Paul gives two sides of the argument, for and against. 'However/but' starts the other side and I believe Paul's view, because he ends it with verse 15.
Several months ago, I read a blog that belongs to an Orthodox Jewish wife, of a rabbi in Israel. She was saying that many of the women do not wear burkas but wear wigs over their hair. Some even wear them at home and only their husbands have ever seen their hair.
In Adam Clarke's commentary, I was reading tonight where a Jewish woman told how no one in her home had ever seen her hair. She kept it braided and covered all the time.
If this is about good or bad angels seeing a woman praying, well that would be anytime a woman prays, not just in church.
The church at Corinth had many Gentiles but there were Jews as well and I can see this easily being one of those things that Paul dealt with all the time. Like circumcision, feasts, etc., etc....
Just my thoughts...
Last edited: