-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
"Since customs have changed and hairstyles no longer mean what they did in the societies of Paul's time, his specific instructions are no longer relevant to modern Christians. However, the principle behind these instructions, of being sensitive to what message our dress codes and styles convey to others, still holds."
couldn't disagree more.
that's not what it is about, at all.
couldn't disagree more.
that's not what it is about, at all.
Therapon teaching Christ-less antigospel and antisemitic Dual Covenant Theology.
and claiming it is Bible.
and quoting Christ's condemnation of the jews who rejected Him and were cut for so doing so...to 'prove' his point.
so what else is new?
i'm going to your thread to ask some questions Therapon.
concerning this:
please just link to the thread you wish to discuss this on.
and claiming it is Bible.
and quoting Christ's condemnation of the jews who rejected Him and were cut for so doing so...to 'prove' his point.
so what else is new?
i'm going to your thread to ask some questions Therapon.
concerning this:
please just link to the thread you wish to discuss this on.
Last edited:
J
Well, the question isn't about whether we ought to be taking the Bible literally or not; we ought to read the Bible 1. In the context of all of Scripture, 2. In the context of the Canon (OT and NT), 3. The genre of writing, 4. The context in which the original writing was received. It would be wise in some cases and foolishness in others to presume that we (as individuals or the church gathered together for worship) ought to directly put us in the text.
First, let me say I am an American by birth and a Quebecker by Choice. I have lived in two relatively different cultures. Because of this, how we read the texts will be slightly different. India traditionally has a much more traditional understanding of authority and hierachy and the notion of preordained rules (from such things as gender, social class, and economics). This is what we were traditionally taught, please correct me if I am misrepresenting your culture.
The United States, in contrast, was historically founded on much more liberal and egalitarian values. This is why the argument for gay marriage has gained so strongly. This is not to say the country has always been true to its roots, but generally over time it has pushed for individual right and egalitarianism.
In my mind women wearing head garments are not Biblically obligatory. But I am not an egalatarian. I believe the NT forbids women from governing the Church and from being the regular Bible teacher/preacher in the context of Christian Worship. Am I being inconsistent? I do not believe so. When Paul says that, this was because many women were abusing his own concept of Christian equality (Gal. 3:28) and ignoring the creational difference we have on earth. The context in which men and women are completely unequivocally equal is in the manner of justification (being reconciled and forgiven by God). Not sanctification (the living out of the Christian life). In the Greco-Women world, women still had traditional gender roles in society. And this was extended to clothes and head coverings. In a misapplication of their Christian freedom, they hurt the name in Christ and were willing to cause social chaos. Christians were seen as insane not for their belief in the foolishness of the cross, but having a chaotic social order. This is why Paul using apostlic authority to command them to wear them so that may live peacefully amoung all persons. Paul wanted it to be clear that Christians believed that God had instituted gender roles from creation and that the world would see it in practice.
In our context, how we show the creational difference (though let me be clear: difference doesn't mean different in value or worth but in the context of the home and the church) is logically different. In Civil society it makes no sense for women to wear head coverings (though in the NT that would have been what Paul was commanding literally to the readers of his epistle). In the Church and family, how today we show it? Well some don't. They call themselves Christian egalitarians or feminists. I disagree with my brothers and sisters on this subject even though I love and respect many. But the majority do who profess belief in the authority of the Scriptures. Each church and family will handle it differently.
If your curious about this subject there is an excellent organisation that is devoted to thinking and publishing (mostly all for free) about this subject called Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (cbmw).
I hope I was of some help.
First, let me say I am an American by birth and a Quebecker by Choice. I have lived in two relatively different cultures. Because of this, how we read the texts will be slightly different. India traditionally has a much more traditional understanding of authority and hierachy and the notion of preordained rules (from such things as gender, social class, and economics). This is what we were traditionally taught, please correct me if I am misrepresenting your culture.
The United States, in contrast, was historically founded on much more liberal and egalitarian values. This is why the argument for gay marriage has gained so strongly. This is not to say the country has always been true to its roots, but generally over time it has pushed for individual right and egalitarianism.
In my mind women wearing head garments are not Biblically obligatory. But I am not an egalatarian. I believe the NT forbids women from governing the Church and from being the regular Bible teacher/preacher in the context of Christian Worship. Am I being inconsistent? I do not believe so. When Paul says that, this was because many women were abusing his own concept of Christian equality (Gal. 3:28) and ignoring the creational difference we have on earth. The context in which men and women are completely unequivocally equal is in the manner of justification (being reconciled and forgiven by God). Not sanctification (the living out of the Christian life). In the Greco-Women world, women still had traditional gender roles in society. And this was extended to clothes and head coverings. In a misapplication of their Christian freedom, they hurt the name in Christ and were willing to cause social chaos. Christians were seen as insane not for their belief in the foolishness of the cross, but having a chaotic social order. This is why Paul using apostlic authority to command them to wear them so that may live peacefully amoung all persons. Paul wanted it to be clear that Christians believed that God had instituted gender roles from creation and that the world would see it in practice.
In our context, how we show the creational difference (though let me be clear: difference doesn't mean different in value or worth but in the context of the home and the church) is logically different. In Civil society it makes no sense for women to wear head coverings (though in the NT that would have been what Paul was commanding literally to the readers of his epistle). In the Church and family, how today we show it? Well some don't. They call themselves Christian egalitarians or feminists. I disagree with my brothers and sisters on this subject even though I love and respect many. But the majority do who profess belief in the authority of the Scriptures. Each church and family will handle it differently.
If your curious about this subject there is an excellent organisation that is devoted to thinking and publishing (mostly all for free) about this subject called Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (cbmw).
I hope I was of some help.
S
Well I am not confused myself. Because I believe in these scriptures completely and in showing (covering head in church) that Christ(before marriage) and my husband(after marriage) has authority over me But the thing was, many of my friends back in India, following the western culture, has stopped covering their heads in church. Like it has become this new "trend" to rebel against God. So this seemed like a good platform to bring this topic to attention. And also getting some feedback from different perspectives around the globe.
Btw your interpretation of Indian culture was right on target!
But the thing was, many of my friends back in India, following the western culture, has stopped covering their heads in church. Like it has become this new "trend" to rebel against God. So this seemed like a good platform to bring this topic to attention. And also getting some feedback from different perspectives around the globe. Btw your interpretation of Indian culture was right on target!
J
Well I am not confused myself. Because I believe in these scriptures completely and in showing (covering head in church) that Christ(before marriage) and my husband(after marriage) has authority over me But the thing was, many of my friends back in India, following the western culture, has stopped covering their heads in church. Like it has become this new "trend" to rebel against God. So this seemed like a good platform to bring this topic to attention. And also getting some feedback from different perspectives around the globe.
Btw your interpretation of Indian culture was right on target!
But the thing was, many of my friends back in India, following the western culture, has stopped covering their heads in church. Like it has become this new "trend" to rebel against God. So this seemed like a good platform to bring this topic to attention. And also getting some feedback from different perspectives around the globe. Btw your interpretation of Indian culture was right on target!
Well I am not confused myself. Because I believe in these scriptures completely and in showing (covering head in church) that Christ(before marriage) and my husband(after marriage) has authority over me But the thing was, many of my friends back in India, following the western culture, has stopped covering their heads in church. Like it has become this new "trend" to rebel against God. So this seemed like a good platform to bring this topic to attention. And also getting some feedback from different perspectives around the globe.
Btw your interpretation of Indian culture was right on target!
But the thing was, many of my friends back in India, following the western culture, has stopped covering their heads in church. Like it has become this new "trend" to rebel against God. So this seemed like a good platform to bring this topic to attention. And also getting some feedback from different perspectives around the globe. Btw your interpretation of Indian culture was right on target!
That comment was highly uncalled for.
Looks to me like this thread was created with a little bit of a self righteous attitude.
You read my mind!
I'm pretty sure the scripturs say multiple times that God doesn't judge outward appearance.
But since not wearing a covering is rebelling against God then I guess women wearing pants is too.
I also wear makeup, color my hair, wax my eyebrows and shave my legs. To top it all off I had plastic surgery when I was 18. I guess I'm just a walking abomination.
I'm pretty sure the scripturs say multiple times that God doesn't judge outward appearance.
But since not wearing a covering is rebelling against God then I guess women wearing pants is too.
I also wear makeup, color my hair, wax my eyebrows and shave my legs. To top it all off I had plastic surgery when I was 18. I guess I'm just a walking abomination.