 |
Actscelerate.com
Open Any Time -- Day or Night
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Message |
Author |
 Is a "male covering" for women to minister, a scriptural requirement? |
bonnie knox |
In reading the comments on the "nash16" website, I noticed that one poster mentioned "...the Scriptural viewpoint that women are to serve in ministry under a male covering...."
Is this viewpoint indeed scriptural? |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
6/11/16 11:29 am
|
|
|
|  |
 |
|
|
| |
Change Agent |
Don't know of any scripture. Just men wanting to put women under them!  |
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1449
6/11/16 11:46 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Old Time Country Preacher |
| What is a male covering? |
Acts-pert Poster
Posts: 15570
6/11/16 11:46 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
bonnie knox |
| Old Time Country Preacher wrote: | | What is a male covering? |
Are you one a them fellers what has gender neutral kivvers? What we might call transkivvers? |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
6/11/16 11:52 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
bonnie knox |
On a more serious note, Ole Timer, the context to me seems to indicate that the commenter was referring to authority, i.e., a woman may minister in whatever capacity as long as there is a male who authorizes her to minister, some male in a hierarchy over her to whom she is answerable.
Does that clarify it for you? |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
6/11/16 11:54 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Carolyn Smith |
1 Corinthians 11: 1-16
1 Follow my example, as I follow the example of Christ.
2 I praise you for remembering me in everything and for holding to the traditions just as I passed them on to you.
3 But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.
4 Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head.
5 But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is the same as having her head shaved.
6 For if a woman does not cover her head, she might as well have her hair cut off; but if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, then she should cover her head.
7 A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man.
8 For man did not come from woman, but woman from man;
9 neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.
10 It is for this reason that a woman ought to have authority over her own head, because of the angels.
11 Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman.
12 For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God.
13 Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered?
14 Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him,
15 but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering.
16 If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice—nor do the churches of God.
Now...what does that mean?
_________________
"More of Him...less of me."
http://twitter.com/camiracle77
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=691241499&ref=name |
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 5923
6/11/16 1:38 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
bonnie knox |
| Carolyn, we apparently believe that was something specific to physical head coverings in the Corinthian church since we do not wear head coverings now. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
6/11/16 2:46 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Old Time Country Preacher |
| bonnie knox wrote: | | On a more serious note, Ole Timer, the context to me seems to indicate that the commenter was referring to authority, i.e., a woman may minister in whatever capacity as long as there is a male who authorizes her to minister, some male in a hierarchy over her to whom she is answerable. |
Yep, his name is JESUS! |
Acts-pert Poster
Posts: 15570
6/11/16 4:13 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Is a "male covering" for women to minister under a scriptural requirement? |
Link |
| bonnie knox wrote: | In reading the comments on the "nash16" website, I noticed that one poster mentioned "...the Scriptural viewpoint that women are to serve in ministry under a male covering...."
Is this viewpoint indeed scriptural? |
As in a man's bandana instead of a woman's scarf?
It irks me whenever I hear of a person being called a 'covering', especially if someone tries to bring in I Corinthians 11 as evidence, where 'covering' clearly doesn't refer to human beings. It's a good topic for using scriptural terminology, imo.
In some of 'Third Wave' churches and some of the Charismatic churches, there is a belief that everyone as to have a 'covering' to submit to. 'Third Wave' is kind of like Charismatic except these are churches that came to believe in the gifts after the Charismatic movement and some of them were from evangelical background rather than 'mainline.'
So if someone is ministering, someone else might ask, 'Who is your covering?' I suppose the covering must be a pastor, or these days, could also be an 'apostle' and that person has to have a covering all the way up to the guy on the top. I don't know what they do with the guy on top. Someone would have to answer directly to God unless you can have overlapping coverings.
What I see in the Bible is that the apostles would preach, churches would form, and they wouldn't come back for a period of months to several years before appointing local leaders. I don't see any evidence for this 'covering' teaching in the Bible, but I suppose they could argue that all these churches had Paul or Barnabas as a covering.
We all need to be knitted together with other members and we need to honor those who are leadership in the body and in the home. But the whole 'covering' line of reasoning doesn't fit with me. It's weird and foreign terminology to those who aren't used to it, it's not really Biblical terminology, and 'covering' language has been used in some really 'heavy shepherding' situations. So it doesn't sit well with me when I hear this stuff.
Does a woman have to have a covering to minister? Let's think about it. A Christian woman goes to get her tires changed. She's between churches and unmarried and her father died last month. She just moved from one city to another. She ends up getting into a conversation with the guy behind the desk at Sears and tells him about Jesus. She just ministered in one-on-one evangelism. Uh-oh? Who is her covering? The guy gets saved. Should she have told him about Jesus?
We probably sound weird to people, too, when we overload them with what sounds to them like religious mumbo jumbo. It doesn't bother me so much when it's out of the Bible and we have some basis for it.
I guess folks are scared that if you don't have a covering, you might have a problem at the next level or even the Jezebel spirit, and you might not be able to plead the blood right.
_________________
Link |
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11849
6/11/16 6:01 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Is a "male covering" for women to minister under a scriptural requirement? |
Old Time Country Preacher |
| Link wrote: | | It irks me whenever I hear of...'Third Wave' churches and some of the Charismatic churches, there is a belief that... |
This is what irks the ole timer, Link. You could take your comments above and place just about any wacko, foolish, ignorant, eisegetical belief, an some a the folk in the Third Wave/Charismatic camp is gonna swaller it hook, line & sinker. I get the feelin that the more bizaare, the more ridiculous, a belief is, the more they embrace. Because of media (Christian TV, God Tube, etc.) the average Classical Pentecostal is exposed to such junk, an unfortunately, a heap a them (even preachers) eat it up too.
Its a sad state of affairs. |
Acts-pert Poster
Posts: 15570
6/11/16 7:30 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Carolyn Smith |
|
|
| |
|
| |
bonnie knox |
What do you think it means for God to be the "head" of Christ in verse 3?
| Carolyn Smith wrote: | You know, verses 4-16 do seem a bit vague & confusing and are probably culturally related.
But verse 3 seems pretty clear to me. Christ is not a head covering or a bandana. |
|
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
6/11/16 9:31 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Link |
Most male COG preachers are too heavy to be a head covering, so forget that.
Ya' gotta lay off on the Shoney's if you want to implement some of these doctrines.
_________________
Link |
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11849
6/12/16 12:34 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| Origin of the "male covering" |
maqqebet |
It started with Ruth who said to Boaz, "So spread your covering over your maid..." - Ruth 3:9
Covering is from the Hebrew kanap and has the primary meaning of "wing" but an extended meaning including "border" and in this case it refers to the "hem" of a garment.
It is translated "wing" in Ruth 2:12, "May the Lord reward your work, and your wages be full from the Lord, the God of Israel, under whose wings you have come to seek refuge."
_________________
The Hammer
Mi kamocah ba'elim Adonai
"Who is like you, Adonai, among the mighty?" (Exodus 15:11, CJB) |
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1771
6/12/16 9:49 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
c6thplayer1 |
| Old Time Country Preacher wrote: | | What is a male covering? |
A transgendered Muslim |
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6385
6/12/16 12:52 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
bonnie knox |
| c6thplayer1 wrote: | | Old Time Country Preacher wrote: | | What is a male covering? |
A transgendered Muslim |
 |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
6/12/16 1:25 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Origin of the "male covering" |
bonnie knox |
Is there anything in the example of the kinsman-redeemer that compares to a requirement under the new covenant that a woman is unable to minister unless she has a man in authority over her?
| maqqebet wrote: | It started with Ruth who said to Boaz, "So spread your covering over your maid..." - Ruth 3:9
Covering is from the Hebrew kanap and has the primary meaning of "wing" but an extended meaning including "border" and in this case it refers to the "hem" of a garment.
It is translated "wing" in Ruth 2:12, "May the Lord reward your work, and your wages be full from the Lord, the God of Israel, under whose wings you have come to seek refuge." |
|
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
6/12/16 1:33 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Carolyn Smith |
| bonnie knox wrote: | What do you think it means for God to be the "head" of Christ in verse 3?
| Carolyn Smith wrote: | You know, verses 4-16 do seem a bit vague & confusing and are probably culturally related.
But verse 3 seems pretty clear to me. Christ is not a head covering or a bandana. |
|
Sorry, Bonnie. I wasn't ignoring your question...just been busy.
I don't really subscribe to the whole "covering" thing that has been taken way out of balance in some circles. I believe in covering as it relates to submission and authority (again, in a balanced view.)
When God created the earth & Adam & Eve, He brought order from chaos.
With order and structure comes some kind of hierarchy. Someone has to be in charge. Adam & Eve were both given dominion over everything but their roles/functions were different.
One of the things that falls to the wayside in the whole submission/authority discussion is that the one who has authority also has responsibility and accountability. This brings protection to the one he has authority over. It is not about ruling with an iron fist. It's not even necessarily about being male. It is about order and someone having the ability to make decisions - or working together with the other person/people to make those decisions.
What makes for a great leader/team at work? A great leader who is not threatened by the people under him/her, who can work together with others so that responsibility is shared, but at the same time has the ability to make decisions for the team, if necessary. The buck stops with him/her. A great leader isn't just about making himself look good or about being in charge. A great leader looks out for and protects his people. A great leader knows how to bring out the best in his/her team, often by freeing them to make wise decisions on their own, also. But a great team doesn't usually happen without someone in charge.
As for your question about God being the head of Christ...the term "Christ" is a title, not Jesus' last name, which I'm sure you know. Jesus was the Christ, the Anointed One. Jesus came to this earth and humbled Himself to become a man, and while here He submitted Himself to the will of the Father. Everything He did while he was on the earth was at the will of His Father. So it is established that Jesus, the Christ, the Son, submitted Himself to God, the Father.
My understanding of the Trinity is very simple. In teaching children, we told the kids that the Trinity is like the God family: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. All are God, but they too have different roles/functions.
The Word says that the Son does not know the day or the hour that He will return, but the Father only. So in my simple understanding, the Father holds executive privilege in some things. So I don't have a problem believing that God (the Father) is the head of Christ (the Son.)
I feel like I've wandered around to answer this question. Hope it makes sense. 
_________________
"More of Him...less of me."
http://twitter.com/camiracle77
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=691241499&ref=name |
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 5923
6/12/16 2:05 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Covering |
Change Agent |
| I've never heard stated that a man needs a covering for his ministry, but it always seems to be applied to women in ministry. Just another example of keeping women under subjection of men. We will see another example of it at the GA in Nashville. Stay tuned. |
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1449
6/12/16 2:22 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
bonnie knox |
| Quote: | When God created the earth & Adam & Eve, He brought order from chaos.
With order and structure comes some kind of hierarchy. Someone has to be in charge. Adam & Eve were both given dominion over everything but their roles/functions were different. |
Not all order requires hierarchy, but in any case, there is nothing in the creation story that says Adam was given hierarchy over Eve. Also they were given the same mandate:
Genesis 1:
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
There is nothing there about different roles or functions.
As far as Jesus not knowing the day nor hour, I believe that that was while Jesus was on earth in his incarnate form.
If you are saying that there is hierarchy in the Trinity, that means that not all 3 persons of the Godhead are of the same substance. (Basically Arianism.) There is one God, and the three "persons" of the Godhead are of the same substance.
Another thing about the verse in 1 Corinthians 11 is that it is not ordered like a hierarchy. If it were, it would say God is the head of Christ who is head of man who is head of woman, but that is not the way it is ordered.
I don't believe that head in verse 3 means authority.
As far as teamwork, I do believe hierarchical teamwork can work. I also believe egalitarian teamwork can work. And I do agree with you that if the teamwork is hierarchical it is better for the top person not to rule with an iron fist. But that discussion comes only after we establish that there has to be a hierarchy in the first place, and specifically, as it relates to the OP, a hierarchy in which there is always a male human over any female minister. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
6/12/16 2:32 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
