Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!
  • Welcome to Talk Jesus Christian Forums

    Celebrating 20 Years!

    A bible based, Jesus Christ centered community.

    Register Log In

Is Ephesians 5:22-33 "Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord." outdated?

Dear sister Sue.

Please give When God Was A Woman a read. You are equal mentally to any man. You weren't created to SUBMIT to the will of anyone. Man or woman or even god!

It's your life. You are an adult. So as long as you are not hurting anyone your life is yours to live your way.
;-)


In the first place -- God was never a woman -- so no reason to read that book.

Everyone is to be submitting to God first. His will is that all would come to a saving knowledge of Himself. So I am to be submissive to God's Will / plan for my life. So -- am 'I' living a Godly life 'today'?!

And Then -- as a man or woman is considering marriage -- it would be to a Godly man - in my case. I would be doing things in connection with other Godly people. Those of similar interests. And we live by Godly morals /ethics.

As a born-again believer my life is not mine to live any way I want to. No one should be living that way. It's very selfish.
 
1 Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.
2 Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.
3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.
4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.
5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.
6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.
7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.
8 For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man.
9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.
10 For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.
11 Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.
12 For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God.
13 Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?
14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?
15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.
16 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.

1 Corinthians 11: 5-16 Biblical Exegesis


Excerpt used for EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY: 1 MacDonald, W. (1995). Believer’s Bible Commentary: Old and New Testaments. (A. Farstad, Ed.) (pp. 1785–1787). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.

11:5 Every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, that is, the man. She is saying, in effect, that she does not recognize man’s God-given headship and will not submit to it.

If this were the only verse in the Bible on the subject, then it would imply that it is all right for a woman to pray or prophesy in the assembly as long as she has a veil or other covering on her head. But Paul teaches elsewhere that women should be silent in the assembly (1 Cor. 14:34), that they are not permitted to teach or to have authority over the man but to be in silence (1 Tim. 2:12).

Actually meetings of the assembly do not come into view until verse 17, so the instructions concerning the head-covering in verses 2–16 cannot be confined to church meetings. They apply to whenever a woman prays or prophesies. She prays silently in the assembly, since 1 Timothy 2:8 limits public prayer to the men (lit., males). She prays audibly or silently at other times. She prophesies when she teaches other women (Titus 2:3–5) or children in the Sunday school.

11:6 If a woman is not covered, she might as well be shorn. But if it is shameful for a woman to be shorn or shaved, then she should be covered. The unveiled head of a woman is as shameful as if her hair were cut off. The apostle is not commanding a barber’s operation but rather telling what moral consistency would require!

11:7 In verses 7–10, Paul teaches the subordination of the woman to the man by going back to creation. This should forever lay to rest any idea that his teaching about women’s covering was what was culturally suitable in his day but not applicable to us today. The headship of man and the subjection of woman have been God’s order from the very beginning.

First of all, man is the image and glory of God whereas woman is the glory of man. This means that man was placed on earth as God’s representative, to exercise dominion over it. Man’s uncovered head is a silent witness to this fact. The woman was never given this place of headship; instead she is the glory of man in the sense that she “renders conspicuous the authority of man,” as W. E. Vine expresses it.

Man indeed ought not to cover his head in prayer; it would be tantamount to veiling the glory of God, and this would be an insult to the Divine Majesty.

11:8 Paul next reminds us that man was not created from woman but woman was created from man. The man was first, then the woman was taken from his side. This priority of the man strengthens the apostle’s case for man’s headship.

11:9 The purpose of creation is next alluded to in order to press home the point. Nor was man created primarily for the woman, but rather woman for the man. The Lord distinctly stated in Genesis 2:18, “It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.”

11:10 Because of her position of subordination to man, the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head. The symbol of authority is the head-covering and here it indicates not her own authority but subjection to the authority of her husband.

Why does Paul add because of the angels? We would suggest that the angels are spectators of the things that are happening on earth today, as they were of the things that happened at creation. In the first creation, they saw how woman usurped the place of headship over the man. She made the decision that Adam should have made. As a result of this, sin entered the human race with its unspeakable aftermath of misery and woe. God does not want what happened in the first creation to be repeated in the new creation. When the angels look down, He wants them to see the woman acting in subjection to the man, and indicating this outwardly by a covering on her head.

We might pause here to state that the head-covering is simply an outward sign and it is of value only when it is the outward sign of an inward grace. In other words, a woman might have a covering on her head and yet not truly be submissive to her husband. In such a case, to wear a head-covering would be of no value at all. The most important thing is to be sure that the heart is truly subordinate; then a covering on a woman’s head becomes truly meaningful.

11:11 Paul is not implying that man is at all independent of the woman, so he adds: “Nevertheless, neither is man independent of woman, nor woman independent of man, in the Lord.” In other words, man and woman are mutually dependent. They need one another and the idea of subordination is not at all in conflict with the idea of mutual interdependence.

11:12 Woman came from man by creation, that is, she was created from Adam’s side. But Paul points out that man also comes through woman. Here he is referring to the process of birth. The woman gives birth to the man child. Thus God has created this perfect balance to indicate that the one cannot exist without the other.

All things are from God means that He has divinely appointed all these things, so there is no just cause for complaint. Not only were these relationships created by God, but the purpose of them all is to glorify Him. All of this should make the man humble and the woman content.

11:13 The apostle now challenges the Corinthians to judge among themselves if it is proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered. He appeals to their instinctive sense. The suggestion is that it is not reverent or decorous for a woman to enter into the presence of God unveiled.

11:14 Just how does nature itself teach us that it is a shame for a man to have long hair is not made clear. Some have suggested that a man’s hair will not naturally grow into as long tresses as a woman’s. For a man to have long hair makes him appear effeminate. In most cultures, the male wears his hair shorter than the female.

11:15 Verse 15 has been greatly misunderstood by many. Some have suggested that since a woman’s hair is given to her for a covering, it is not necessary for her to have any other covering. But such a teaching does grave violence to this portion of Scripture. Unless one sees that two coverings are mentioned in this chapter, the passage becomes hopelessly confusing. This may be demonstrated by referring back to verse 6. There we read: “For if a woman is not covered, let her also be shorn.” According to the interpretation just mentioned, this would mean that if a woman “does not have her hair on,” then she might just as well be shorn. But this is ridiculous. If she does not “have her hair on,” she could not possibly be shorn!

The actual argument in verse 15 is that there is a real analogy between the spiritual and the natural. God gave woman a natural covering of glory in a way He did not give to man. There is a spiritual significance to this. It teaches that when a woman prays to God, she should wear a covering on her head. What is true in the natural sphere should be true in the spiritual.

11:16 The apostle closes this section with the statement: “But if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor do the churches of God.” Does Paul mean, as has been suggested, that the things he has just been saying are not important enough to contend about? Does he mean that there was no such custom of women veiling their heads in the churches? Does he mean that these teachings are optional and not to be pressed upon women as the commandments of the Lord? It seems strange that any such interpretations would ever be offered, yet they are commonly heard today. This would mean that Paul considered these instructions as of no real consequence, and he had just been wasting over half a chapter of Holy Scripture in setting them forth!

There are at least two possible explanations of this verse which fit in with the rest of the Scripture. First of all, the apostle may be saying that he anticipates that certain ones will be contentious about these matters, but he adds that we have no such custom, that is, the custom of contending about this. We do not argue about such matters, but accept them as the teaching of the Lord. Another interpretation, favored by William Kelly, is that Paul was saying that the churches of God did not have any such custom as that of women praying or prophesying without being covered.


There is also a growing number of individuals reviving the practice. See https://www.headcoveringmovement.comfor further information.
 
So -- the reality of all this is that IF a woman is going to pray or prophesy in a church meeting, she is to have her head covered. Fine -- I've never been in a church where that happens.

Now -- at one church I've been at -- occasionally pastor will ask a woman to open or close in prayer. But that's a very small informal group. It's not as part of the church service.

The Titus 2:5 passage nothing in that passage saying that the woman is prophesying when she is teaching -- rather it is saying that she can be teaching other women and children. But Not be teaching a mixed group of adults.
 
The bible states that men are supposed to be more than mere "spiritual leaders" in the household. They are to lead in all things, but do so in a loving way. If female "Christians" are not willing to submit then they can take that up with Jesus when they meet him. If "Christian" men decide not to lead they can also take that up with Jesus when they meet him..

We see many "Christians" around the world expressing words of love for God, but inwardly they are empty. Their profession of faith is not genuine or real. Jesus spoke of this when He said, “This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me” (Matthew 15:8).


So you feel that Scripture says that the husband is to lead In Everything ?! ie -- time to change the beds // time to clean the house // get groceries? Etc. Some things in a household would be the wifes' responsibility and some the mans. And these things would be obvious Long before a couple decides to get married.
 
I'm sure all of us have heard the argument that the head covering mentioned in 1 Corinthians 11 1-16 is a woman's hair. I'm sure many who have repeated that have not taken the time to really study this periscope of scripture but instead have learned it from others. Let's take a closer look at that.
 
Hi Senor Pastor -- you've already shared that video -- and what she says I agree with -- that if a woman feels so led To wear a head covering fine - if Not - fine Also. -- sometimes the implications Of Is that if a woman truly Is seeking God's leading in this matter then she Will 'see the light' and do such. If she Isn't 'truly seeking God' then she probably Won't. And from past conversations with you -- you feel that I'm Not really seeking God in this matter.

And you've Further suggested that pastor's Should be teaching the 1 Corinthians passage to their congregations as it's extremely important -- so are all the other passage in Scripture that are Also being taught.

And this second video about the head-coverings 'movement' -- that's all fine and good. But Why is it becoming a 'movement"? Isn't that sort of what a cult is made of. A man who 'sits' on one passage of Scripture and because some choose to follow his leading that Everyone should be doing such, also. So -- a question would be -- does our salvation depend on our following that particular passage of Scripture? No. Because that Could become a good-works 'thing' or legalism. Meaning that a really Spiritual Christian Will follow through with wearing a head covering in church.

And, yes , men Do remove their hats in doors / in church / or wherever.

Now I'll click into your other post.

Okay -- another video -- from my reading and my conclusion -- if a woman chooses to wear a head covering in church - Fine.

The emphasis is on women when praying or prophesying in church. In the churches I've gone to over the years -- it's been men who have prayed in church -- or preached. So -- therefore there has been no need for any of the women To wear a head covering.

So -- Since you advocate women to wear a head covering in Your church -- that's fine. People are free to go to Any church they want to. Paul was talking to that church at that time for a reason.
There was Another man David something who was fully agreeing with you. I asked him if his wife Also wore a head covering and he said No. That she went to a different church that didn't 'highly encourage' women To wear one. As far as he was concerned, she was free to go to church where ever she wanted to go. So -- in My opinion -- he was not being the spiritual leader in his own family. He lost all credibility with me.

So -- I'll continue to go to a large church that does not advocate women wearing a head covering because women never pray during the service or prophesy.

Another question though -- Why would teaching adult women or children be considered prophesying.
 
And, if you'd take a moment to answer the question I'd asked before you shared those three video's.
 
And this second video about the head-coverings 'movement' -- that's all fine and good. But Why is it becoming a 'movement"? Isn't that sort of what a cult is made of.
I do not believe that casting disparaging remarks such as attempting to label "The Head Covering Movement" as some sort of "cult" appropriate. Are these Pastors below cultists? God forbid!


Dr. Carlton C. McLeod, Senior Founding Pastor

R.C. Sproul on Head-Coverings
 
Please -- do not be concerned about 'converting' me to wearing a head covering in church. I do not pray in public or prophesy.

Women teaching other women and / or children is Not prophesying.
 
I thought I would share this which I thought was a very interesting point of view from Dr. Wallace.

As Dr. Daniel Wallace (professor at Dallas Theological Seminary) wrote, “The argument that a real head covering is in view and that such is applicable today is, in some respects, the easiest view to defend exegetically and the hardest to swallow practically... The real danger, as I see it, is that many Christians simply ignore what this text says because any form of obedience to it is inconvenient.” However, obedience to Scripture is important – not only because disobedience dishonors God, but because His commands exist for a purpose. Paul states that the purpose of the headcovering is to honor the Lord's structure of headship and to promote His glory during communication with Him. Indeed, God's authority and glory are highly valued among His people. They are to be especially evident within marriage, a covenant intended to reflect the relationship between Christ and the Church (Ephesians 5:22-33).

One of Jesus' concerns with the Jewish leaders of His time was that they had let go of the “commands of God” in order to “hold onto the traditions of men” (Mark 7:8-9). Similarly, it can be tempting to forgo God's direction in v.2-16 in order to maintain conformity to the norms of modern Western culture. Knowing that some Christians would resist God's instructions in this passage, the Lord inspired Paul to promote unity in the practice of headcovering: “If one is inclined to be contentious, we have no other practice, nor have the churches of God” (v.16).

Phillips, David. Covered Glory: 1 Corinthians 11 & The Christian Use of Headcoverings .
 
Is a woman teaching other women or children - prophesying? Yes or no -- why or why not.
 
1Co 11:2 Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.
1Co 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

1Co 11:15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.

For some men the covering God gave women just is not enough :(
 
A biblical head covering in the city of “Corinth” was a “hijab” it covers her whole head! Only her eyes showed. Had nothing to do with in a church building! The whole Bible testifies to this implicitly. Most women in Corinth or other “Ancient Cities” who were “Women of the Night” had their face [head uncovered]. That is a sign of uncover heads I’m up for business. So it would be a “disgrace” for a Christian woman or a married woman unto her husband or praying Christian woman in the Christian faith to have her head [face] uncovered. Meaning whole head which includes the hair and face. That part scripture is not talking about a beautiful hats with flowers, just sitting on top of a woman’s head.
[guillotines here I come].:(
 
1Co 11:2 Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.
1Co 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

1Co 11:15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.

For some men the covering God gave women just is not enough :(
 
DTS showing its self to once again putting the acts of mankind over the Blood of Christ .
 
Back
Top