Women in Ministry Silenced or Set Free? part 3

1 Corinthians 11 - Head coverings and authority. Should a woman wear a head covering? Should she have no authority or even speak in the church? This hard passage in scripture has been a challenge to the church because it has been unclear why wearing a head covering for a male would shame Christ. A clear understanding of the reason for the shame comes from understanding the cultural background. This verse by verse explanation of the passage will bring this passage to life. This excerpt is taken from 2nd DVD of the 4 DVD set called "Women in Ministry Silenced or Set Free?" available from Amazon.com or mmoutreach.org

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• egalitarian
• complementarian
• debate
• cheryl
• schatz
• cbmw
• john
• macarthur
• church
• women
• ministry
• bible
• mm
• outreach
• 1Corinthians14
• macgregor
• ministries

[MsWarrior02]

So let me see if I get this straight....before the death and resurrection of Christ, Jewish men had to wear coverings on their heads because of their shame of their sin, and Paul radically does away with that tradition...but Jewish women still had to remain veiled and basically be ashamed to be born women and carry all the blame for sin, and Paul does NOTHING to do away with this for the women as he does for the men...I'm sorry, God forgive me, but can we say the words DOUBLE STANDARD???

[inhistime2007]

@MsWarrior02

Women had a double reason to wear the covering. It had nothing to do with being ashamed of being a woman. If they removed their covering their husband would divorce them. Paul allowed women to cover to keep their marriages and when the tradition that would cause their divorce was done away with, they would be free from the tradition to cover without risking a divorce. It was not a double standard as men only had one reason to cover and they did not risk being divorced.

[SilverMoonSpa]

It is interesting that you would choose to quote a Jewish man to discern what Christians ought to do. We are to veil because of the angels. Satan tempted the woman, and that was Satan's showing how he disregarded the Godly order of God covering man, Man covering woman. Myself, I am a woman who has come out of great darkness, and the headcovering has set me free in many ways. Those who eschew the covering in the west, have never tried it for themselves. Christianity is an experiential faith

[inhistime2007]

@SilverMoonSpa the quote was not given "what Christians ought to do" but was a quote showing what the headcovering meant. It is a covering because of the shame of sin. Is that appropriate for Christians who have had their sin covered by the blood of Jesus? There is no other spiritual covering but Jesus Christ and His blood. Nothing is needed when we have Jesus. The meaning of the physical covering is clearly not Christian. We are pure before God and don't need a symbol of our old shame.

[inhistime2007]

It is about head coverings which would of course cover the hair. The tradition said that a woman's head (and hair) must be covered and Paul said her hair has been given naturally by God as a covering. Same for men. He also has a natural head covering.

[dejablue88]

I honestly don't understand why everyone is so adamantly arguing with this woman over stupid head coverings. When in most churches women do not wear such things and are not being punished for it.

[CrushBook]

You need to stop reading the talmud

[tribunalfunk]

I can't believe that people believe this stuff.

[kiekie84]

@adaneth very woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head/if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn so does this mean that the bible contradicts it's self? either we can uncover our head by shorning or shaving our hair or we can cover our head with our hair by not shorning it or shaving because it dishonoures our head which is it? could it be that we need look more closely at what these verses mean so that they don't contradict themselves