If you would like to ask a question or make a comment about the material presented in this video, please use the contact form at this link: bibletalk.tv/contact/video/oae6JvWA0jM
I enjoyed this two part message up until it was mentioned that head coverings were cultural. You had just denied claims that women can be deacons because of cultural change, because you know the role of women in the church, you know that they are not to usurp authority over their head, the man. And then you state that head coverings is simply cultural, completely missing the point that it is tied to the same principle as women not being leaders in the church. It is a symbol that she is recognizing the God given order of authority. I don’t understand why this is so easily swept away.
Head coverings like foot washing were part of the culture of the time, and not something commanded or taught by Jesus or the Apostles. Paul talks about these type of things and how they should be accommodated by Christians of that period. The point was that they weren’t to misuse or violate cultural practices that could bring dishonor to or cause strife within the church. The role of men and women in the church, however, was not based on cultural habits but given by God. That a wife was to submit to her husband in the Lord, for example, was not simply a cultural thing (like head coverings or footwashing) subject to change from generation to generation or from one culture to another, it was an eternal principle not subject to change. We need to discern when the writers were discussing eternal, unchanging commands or principles, and practices that were simply part of that culture commented on but not commanded by the writers of the epistles. - MM
Thank you for posting these lessons. I have learned a lot and much has been clarified.
If you would like to ask a question or make a comment about the material presented in this video, please use the contact form at this link: bibletalk.tv/contact/video/oae6JvWA0jM
I enjoyed this two part message up until it was mentioned that head coverings were cultural. You had just denied claims that women can be deacons because of cultural change, because you know the role of women in the church, you know that they are not to usurp authority over their head, the man. And then you state that head coverings is simply cultural, completely missing the point that it is tied to the same principle as women not being leaders in the church. It is a symbol that she is recognizing the God given order of authority. I don’t understand why this is so easily swept away.
Head coverings like foot washing were part of the culture of the time, and not something commanded or taught by Jesus or the Apostles. Paul talks about these type of things and how they should be accommodated by Christians of that period. The point was that they weren’t to misuse or violate cultural practices that could bring dishonor to or cause strife within the church.
The role of men and women in the church, however, was not based on cultural habits but given by God. That a wife was to submit to her husband in the Lord, for example, was not simply a cultural thing (like head coverings or footwashing) subject to change from generation to generation or from one culture to another, it was an eternal principle not subject to change. We need to discern when the writers were discussing eternal, unchanging commands or principles, and practices that were simply part of that culture commented on but not commanded by the writers of the epistles.
- MM
1 cor 11v1-16 Paul does teach women to cover there head