Uncut Hair

[Truthseeker]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

.

It is probably pretty clear that long hair is regarded as a beautiful thing on a woman. My wife has never cut her hair and when she lets it down people will stop her and ask her about it. Even though most people would say we are overboard for teaching uncut hair people certainly seem to admire it. It is distinctly feminine. The law does command a woman not to wear a man's garment and it also describes the role of the husband and the wife. God has made distinctions between male and female.

Surely many here can see the blurring of male and female roles. I think this hair issue is much to do with this concept. To me a ladies hair and attire is just as much about gender distinction as it is modesty. Gender distinction is respecting the way God created us and the order he designed. Is it any wonder we have a crisis of gender identity confusion in this American culture.

No argument here that women should have long hair, but to judge others over cut hair is the issue.


BTW I notice same text you gave mentions ornaments. Hhhmmmm

[Truthseeker]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Bump for Truthseeker...

I already mentioned some things were advisory. Other things were commands.

[Truthseeker]

Originally Posted by Truthseeker

You know it was prophesied of the messiah coming. The OT was the shadow. At least there was OT ordinances that pointed to him coming. You got anything in OT that points to covering or the uncut hair doctrin


Please answer this, if it was wrong for a OT saint to cut their hair or go unveiled how would they know it is?

Bump for Esaias

[Godsdrummer]

I have said this before, and with all this going back and forth about this subject, I believe it even more.

If a subject in scripture is unclear to the point that it generates so much debate how can it first off be salvational. Secondly how can one say God commanded it? God never gave a commandment that was not easily understood. This alone should settle the idea that it was cultural to Corinth and Corinth alone, not all the churches. If the first part of this chapter is about headship, and I believe it is, the veiling was applicable to Corinth and Corinth alone.

Paul addresses headship in other letters to other churches and does not address the subject of wearing a veil. It has been said if it is in the word of God once how many times must it be repeated to be a command. This thinking ignores the context and to who it was written to. Thus attempting to make something applicable to all when it was only applicable to those Paul was writing to.

Paul writes to the church in Ephesus about headship but does not mention wearing a veil, why not, if it is so important. Why not in his other letters to other churches did not Paul teach veiling. Finally how and where do we get in this passage, that this is a command? Paul does not one time say it is a command.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Truthseeker

I already mentioned some things were advisory. Other things were commands.

Did you read what was bumped? Your statement doesn't address what I asked.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

I have said this before, and with all this going back and forth about this subject, I believe it even more.

If a subject in scripture is unclear to the point that it generates so much debate how can it first off be salvational. Secondly how can one say God commanded it? God never gave a commandment that was not easily understood. This alone should settle the idea that it was cultural to Corinth and Corinth alone, not all the churches. If the first part of this chapter is about headship, and I believe it is, the veiling was applicable to Corinth and Corinth alone.

Paul addresses headship in other letters to other churches and does not address the subject of wearing a veil. It has been said if it is in the word of God once how many times must it be repeated to be a command. This thinking ignores the context and to who it was written to. Thus attempting to make something applicable to all when it was only applicable to those Paul was writing to.

Paul writes to the church in Ephesus about headship but does not mention wearing a veil, why not, if it is so important. Why not in his other letters to other churches did not Paul teach veiling. Finally how and where do we get in this passage, that this is a command? Paul does not one time say it is a command.

It only generates controversy because people don't want to obey what it teaches. There was no controversy about this passage until the last century. It was all easy to understand until about 100 years ago, when people got too smart for their own good.

[Truthseeker]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Did you read what was bumped? Your statement doesn't address what I asked.

Yes, I gave an answer. Now if I can you to answer mine instead of return questions.

[Godsdrummer]

Originally Posted by Esaias

It only generates controversy because people don't want to obey what it teaches. There was no controversy about this passage until the last century. It was all easy to understand until about 100 years ago, when people got too smart for their own good.

Not true veiling has always been a cultural issue, even the Jew at time did not veil. The fact is the apostles did not require veiling of the Gentiles Acts 15. and Paul only addresses veiling to the church in Corinth. It can only be a cultural issue. We have not gotten to smart for our own good, instead we want to lay a unnecessary weight based on one verse or passage addressed to one particular group of people.

That being said, if I understand you right, and you believe this passage is all about the wearing of a vail, I do agree. This passage has nothing to do with cutting hair. And that is part of the controversy, whether it deals with cutting hair, or wearing a vail.

[Esaias]

Please show where in history there was any controversy about Paul's words and what he was teaching, prior to the last century.

[Esaias]

In Acts 15 the apostles did not require modesty in clothing, or lifting holy hands in prayer without wrath or doubting, or fasting, or even baptism for that matter.