Thy Word is a Lamp unto my feet and a Light unto my path

 

 

Hello again,

 

I read one of the links that you sent me which addressed the subject of the head covering in I Corinthians Chapter 11. I was not going to get into this other than what I shared in my last email about this, but after what you sent - I must be more absolute.

 

The head covering teaching is not something I grew up with. I don't remember ever hearing instruction on this. I just remember studying one time, and what I saw was that the head covering was an outward sign that the wife was in subjection to her own husband. She was saying by wearing the head covering that she honored her husband, and in honoring him as the head of their union she was honoring the Lord...

 

When two become one flesh there can only be one head.

 

The woman showed her modesty in wearing the covering. She showed that she was quiet and submissive to her husband’s leadership. She did not teach or pray in the local assembly, but when she did teach or pray when other women or children were present (for instance a women's Bible study, or children's Sunday school class), she did so with her head covered as a token of her submission unto her husband and if unmarried unto the Lord.

 

That was over 20 years ago. I have since learned much more about what Paul was instructing.

 

I don't believe the Bible teaches that women are to be in subjection to men in the local assembly. This, and some other subjects border on, and go over into legalism and bondage and I really don't care to go backwards. We who are "IN CHRIST" are members of the body of Christ, and He is the head of the entire body. My understanding is that men are not the head of women except in the holy union of marriage.

 

Women in the church are not instructed to be in submission to men in the church.

 

There was a movement in the 70's, if I remember correctly, that taught that a woman, if not married must have a spiritual covering, i.e. a Christian brother in the assembly was to be her spiritual head. This is not based on Scripture and caused many problems in the church. And from what I read at the link you sent me - they are teaching a similar falsehood not borne out in Scripture.

 

This doctrine could be filed close to eating meat offered to idols. If it offends another don't eat meat that you know has been offered to idols. But if you know that meat has been offered to idols and your conscience is clean before God eat the meat in faith toward God - not in the presence of a weaker brother who considers it a sin for him to eat meat offered to idols, but in your own privacy before God eat in liberty.

 

In my studies I have found that the custom of the head covering was a Greek custom, not a Jewish custom. As we know Jewish men (still today), cover their head at worship.

 

We know several things:

 

(1) Paul is writing (2) to Corinthian Christians (3) of that day (4) who had brought the local head covering custom into their assembly; (5) they lived in Greece; (6) Jewish men cover their heads; (7) Jewish women do not cover their heads; (8) there was strife in the Corinth church because of the local head covering custom. These points speak volumes on the subject - but there is way more...

 

Paul was aware of the contention in regards to the local custom, moreover Paul examined it for its value in regards to God's Word. There was disagreement in the Corinth assembly over the women covering their head (among other things), and Paul was teaching them to accept those who desired to adhere to the Greek custom and be not combative toward them. Paul saw nothing contrary to God's Word in the local practice as it pictured the submission of Christ to God, man to Christ, and the wife to her husband.

 

The husband is the head of the wife. 

 

Paul saw the value in the local custom and taught the Corinthian Christians (in Greece), that the local tradition was okay as it did not violate anything in God's Word. Paul made it clear that it was up to each one if they wanted to practice the community custom. It was an individual choice and should not be a matter of debate. 

 

When we look at the Greek meaning and proper syntax we see what Paul was saying:

 

Decide for yourself in regard to the local head covering practice. If you accept it as something you desire to do - follow the custom but don't flaunt it. Don't allow contention or division to be in your midst because of the local norm. Be in unity, edify one another, act in love toward one another, honor one another, be built up together, and in doing so honor the Lord. 

 

The simple understanding is that the local head covering custom did not dishonor or violate God's Word so Paul gave his approval of the custom. But there is more behind Paul's teaching.

 

Corinth was located across the bay from Delphi which was a famous Greek oracle known both for the shrine, and for those who practiced divination in the shrine. The priestesses of Delphi were women who went into trances and spoke in ecstatic tongues.

 

See dictionary:

 

Oracle: In Greek religion, priest or priestess who imparted the response of a god to a human questioner. The word is also used to refer to the response itself and to the shrine of a god. Every oracular shrine had a fixed method of divination. Many observed signs, such as the motion of objects dropped into a spring, the movement of birds, or the rustle of leaves. Often dreams were interpreted. A later and popular method involved the use of entranced persons whose ecstatic cries were interpreted by trained attendants. Before an oracle was questioned consultants underwent rites of purification and sacrifice. There were many established oracles in ancient Greece, the most famous being those of Zeus at Dodona and of Apollo at Delphi and at Didyma in Asia Minor. Other oracular shrines were located in Syria, Egypt, and Italy.

 

We can better understand why Paul shared a great deal on tongues practiced in the Corinthian assembly, in that - the Delphi influence was close by.

 

Corinth was also familiar with the priestesses at the Temple of Aphrodite on Acrocorinth; the priestesses were in the thousands; they were temple prostitutes, they often times would not wear a head covering (as was the custom in Greece), and often wore their hair short like a man. This behavior was not becoming of a modest Greek woman. What if one of these Greek prostitutes should get saved? She would need to put on a head covering when she came to a worship service (as was the custom in Greece), in order to show that she was no longer a woman of low moral stature, i.e. a prostitute.  Rather than wait to let her hair grow out to a modest length she wore a head covering.

 

Is this starting to come together?

 

I believe I have made a case which determines that the teaching on the head covering is much more complex than what most modern day teachers expound. The bottom line is that as born from above believers we are brought out of bondage into liberty whereby we can do what the Lord allows us to do in faith. If what we allow is not done in faith toward God, we sin. When our actions are not of faith, we sin, causing severance of fellowship with the Lord.

 

Accordingly, if a woman desires to honor the Lord by wearing some type of head covering in the corporate gathering she is free to do so as long as she does so in faith and does not make a display of what she does for reasons other than faith before God. As long as she does not cause conflict by her head covering she demonstrates love. In other words, a woman wearing or not wearing a head covering should be in faith toward the Lord, and in no way does her freedom place her above another because of what the Lord allows her to do. What we do should be between us and the Lord and in faith toward Him, all else can be filed under vanity and pride. We are not to parade our freedom in front of a weaker Christian, i.e. the liberty that God allows us to walk in. To do so is not acting in love toward our brother or sister and can cause the weaker one to come under bondage to something the Lord has freed them from.

 

An example is the subject of drinking:

 

A weak brother could be one who had a drinking addiction before coming to saving knowledge in Jesus. This person would not be free to drink alcohol before God in faith as drinking alcohol has the propensity to bring he who abused the use of alcohol back into bondage to it. Another believer may be free to drink on occasion in moderation. These are things that pertain to ones personal walk and personal choices in faith between the believer and the Lord. If we knowingly allow our freedom to cause our weaker brother or sister to sin, we are not acting toward them - or the Lord in love. We do not want to cause a weaker brother to stumble into sin because of something (for us), God allows. The theme Paul builds in regards to the Corinthian believers is one of submission one to another because of their mutual love for the Lord Jesus.

 

Do you understand where the teaching that you sent me is totally from man's thinking and does not bear witness with other Scripture? We must always remember that Scripture must be compared with Scripture. And we must also realize that Paul had to deal with the Corinth assembly much different than all other assemblies.

 

This is Paul’s conclusion on the matter found in verse 16:

 

But if any man seem to be contentious (found of strife), we have no such (such a) custom, neither (not the other) the churches (the ones called out to assemble together in worship) of God.

 

Only the Corinth assembly adopted the Greek head covering custom - or at least they were the only church Paul had to teach in regards to the custom. The church at Ephesus, the church at Galatia, the church at Colosse, the church at Philippi, none of these churches adopted the head covering custom - anyway Scripture does not bear this out as far as I can see.

 

I hope this has helped you to understand my understanding of this portion of Scripture.

 

The information I included about the Corinth surroundings and customs came from the Word Study Dictionary edited by Spiros Zodhiates, and the dictionary online at answers.com

 

Respectfully, de~