Being a student at a school with preachers other than ames has really opened my eyes and taught me to look beyond what is there. Some believe that the reason why women cover their heads is because to show they are subserviant. Notice our communion. This has been a trdaition in most churches. However, no one ever questions why paul tells women to cover their heads. There were three kinds of women at that time: free women, slave women, and prostitutes. The only group of women who were allowed to cover their heads were free women. This reason being to be able to distingush between who was who. Slave and Prostitute women had marks on their heads. So when they walk you'll be able to tell they are slaves and prostitutes. These women were also not permitted to enter the temple. Therefore, not able to hear the word. So paul tells them to cover their heads so they will be able to come into the temple and everyone could focus on the service and not the marks on their heads. Women wouldn't have to cover their heads if we stop looking for a mark or a bruise so we can cast them out and use scripture to validate or reason. However, if we understand that God poured out his spirit on all flesh and not just men then maybe our church can strive forward without this extra problem hendering us. God Bless

-- Anonymous, February 10, 2004

Answers

You indirectly made a good point, that Paul was speaking to a very specific people, at a very specific time, within a certain context. Not today's context. So, it is very clear that "God poured out his spirit on all flesh and not just men" then, yesterday, today and will so tomorrow. God bless you.

-- Anonymous, February 10, 2004

From morning till evening he explained and declared to them the kingdom of God and tried to convince them about Jesus from the Law of Moses and from the Prophets. Some were convinced by what he said, but others would not believe. They disagreed among themselves and began to leave after Paul had made this final statement: "The Holy Spirit spoke the truth to your forefathers when he said through Isaiah the prophet: "'Go to this people and say, "You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving." For this people's heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.' (Acts 28:23-27)NIV

LORD have Mercy!!

Do I hear you say that the Holy Scriptures, at least in part, does not apply to us today? That it has become dated, intended for a different time and place and people? Maybe we need a new Apostle, a new Word of Truth, something more modern, more suitable to our sensibilities and vain ambitions. In love I admonish you...STUDENT- LEARN, WOMAN-SUBMIT.

For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Live as children of light (for the fruit of the light consists in all goodness, righteousness and truth) and find out what pleases the Lord. Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them. For it is shameful even to mention what the disobedient do in secret. But everything exposed by the light becomes visible, for it is light that makes everything visible. This is why it is said: "Wake up, O sleeper, rise from the dead, and Christ will shine on you." Be very careful, then, how you live-not as unwise but as wise, making the most of every opportunity, because the days are evil. Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what the Lord's will is. (Eph 5:8-18)NIV

-- Anonymous, February 10, 2004

My brother i feel that we look at scriptures and use them but do not look at their origin. If we were to apply some of paul's teaching to today we will still in slavery in a sense. If i take a scripture and do not properly use it with in the confines it was giving then when it doesn't come to pass we blame God. when in fact we were to lazy to look beyond the words and see the people. I believe that scriptures are in deed the inspired words of God. However, look when paul was preaching and look at when were preaching new issues. God Bless

-- Anonymous, February 10, 2004

I just don't like the look of those funny-looking white hats women wear during Communion. Is it just me or do others see that those white hats make our young women look like, well, elderly women like my mother? Now mind you my Momma is a good looking woman she is just a long-time card carrying member of AARP. QED

-- Anonymous, February 10, 2004

Perhaps there is no greater sin int he body of Christ than the sin of proof texting. The reference scripture that Bro. Harris alludes to from Acts 28 has absolutely NOTHING to do witht the discussion of head covering. To use it here, in my opinion, is disingenous and irresponsible.

Acts 28:23-27 is describing the conflict that existed in the Jewish community over the validity of the Jesus' followers that he was the Messiah as outlined in scriputre and foretold by the prophets. The fact as Paul says, that they hear but do not understand was not a reference to submission of women but whether or not Jesus was who he said he was. The refusal of some Jews to believe or accept the divinity of Jesus as Messiah would cause them to miss out on salvation because their hearts were calloused and they were not allowing the scripture to speak to them spiritually.

For me this scripture is so germaine to the basic tenets of our faith that to use in a discussion of ritual practice is repugnant to me.

Time does not allow for me to expound further but the Ephesians passage is also woefully mishandled in the post. Come on we must read the scripture in its context, God can handle that.

-- Anonymous, February 11, 2004

It is not good to have zeal without knowledge, nor to be hasty and miss the way. (Prov 19:2)NIV

Dearest Brother Gibson,

I marvel at your zeal for the Word and rejoice in the sincerity of your complaint and conviction, as this is furtile soil that can produce thiry or sixty times what is sown in it. As you might imagine, my initial, 'natural' response to your post was to prepare a stinging rebuke and a furious defense. But prayer changes things. We participate on these boards to learn, grow, challenge, encourage and build up. So as I address your objections, please know that in love, my intent is to clarify-not defend; to correct- not rebuke.

You object to what you call 'prooftexting.' For those wondering what proof-texting is - A proof text, biblically speaking, is a Scripture quoted on behalf of a given subject. This is a very simple definition. “Proof texting” Bible doctrines may become more defined, or more complex, when we add the notion of being systematically consistent on a given subject, and exhausting, as best as we are able, to demonstrate a certain set of Scriptures systematically teach a specific doctrine. While I agree that proof- texting can lead into all manners of theological absurdities, even heresy, if one is not exceedingly careful, the Scriptures are so used by preachers, teachers, and lay - even the Prophets, Apostles and the Christ himself - because the Scripture is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. (2 Tim 3:16-17)

With regard to the 'proof-texts,' Acts 28:23-27 and Ephesians 5:8-18 in the post you responded to...

The use of Acts 28:23-27 was not intended as a direct reference to 'covered heads' but rather, speaks to the larger context of wisdom, righteousness and obedience before God, that controversies such as head-covering, holy submission, Law observance, and other such things involve. Likewise, the use of Eph. 5:8-18 was not in 'direct' reference to 'head-covering' but was rather intended to shake and awaken the faithful sleeper to the fearful state of darkness described in Acts 28:25-27, that even the elect can pass through from time to time. It is a call to holy living; an admonishment to remember the things of God, of Christ, and of discipleship, and to put away the corruptions of worldly wisdom (darkness) and to live as children of light-because the days are evil.

You say "perhaps there is no greater sin in the body of Christ than the sin of proof texting." Obviously this is much overstated. In light of the context I've offered, I encourage you to re-read the earlier post to see if your objection still stands - more than that - read the Scriptures! Yours is furtile ground and the Word is growing even now in you.

May the God of peace, who through the blood of the eternal covenant brought back from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great Shepherd of the sheep, equip you with everything good for doing his will, and may he work in us what is pleasing to him, through Jesus Christ, to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen. (Heb 13:20-21)NIV

-- Anonymous, February 11, 2004

I am so glad this sparked the way it did. AME's spend to much time arguing over things of unimportance. God Bless and lets keep knowledge flowing.

-- Anonymous, February 11, 2004

Thank you Bro. Harris for your clarification. However, I still oppose your broad use of Acts 28 passage to support ancient ritual in contemporary contexts.

Perhaps my interpretation of the Acts 28 passage is so much narrower than yours because I feel it goes to the core of Christian faith and belief. Who Jesus is from the foundation of scriptures should not be trivialized in my theological view by what I think is a very questionable application in your ancient call for the cultural and spiritual submission of women.

Just for clarification, I did read the scripture passage and whether you think the ground in me is futile or fertile is really of no consequence. I still vigorously assert that we should not proof text in order to support position that further oppression.

Perhaps we must agree to disagree on how you used Acts 28 but I frankly do not think you have any theological justification to make any inference that since I do not see it the way you see it, I am living in darkness.

That is just a form of fundamentalist persecution that I strongly reject and find repugnant in all its forms. What nerve to accuse those who have a saving faith in Jesus Christ of not being saved because they don't read things the way you do.

How outrageous a claim to state that because one is indifferent or opposed to this head covering ritual that they are not living holy or are in submission to the Lord.

-- Anonymous, February 11, 2004

Brother Gibson,

Where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known. And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love. (1 Cor 13:8-13)NIV

Peace.

-- Anonymous, February 12, 2004

Interesting response. I am not quite sure how it applies but nevertheless..

18But in fact God has arranged the parts in the body, every one of them, just as he wanted them to be. 19If they were all one part, where would the body be? 20As it is, there are many parts, but one body. 21The eye cannot say to the hand, "I don't need you!" And the head cannot say to the feet, "I don't need you!" 22On the contrary, those parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, 23and the parts that we think are less honorable we treat with special honor. And the parts that are unpresentable are treated with special modesty, 24while our presentable parts need no special treatment. But God has combined the members of the body and has given greater honor to the parts that lacked it, 25so that there should be no division in the body, but that its parts should have equal concern for each other. 26If one part suffers, every part suffers with it; if one part is honored, every part rejoices with it. 27Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it. 28And in the church God has appointed first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, also those having gifts of healing, those able to help others, those with gifts of administration, and those speaking in different kinds of tongues. 29Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? 30Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret? 31But eagerly desire the greater gifts. And now I will show you the most excellent way.

1 Cor 12:18-31 (NIV)

-- Anonymous, February 12, 2004

Dear Brother Gibson,

Thank you for sharing the verses from 1st Corinthians. They are definitely favorites and remind us that differences do not necessarily constitute antipathy or error. With this in mind, let's revisit your earlier post that contained some rather difficult characterizations of my position that cause me to believe that further clarification is necessary. Though I wouldn't want to belabor any genuine differences of opinion, I would not rest until perceived offenses caused by me-inadvertently or not-were put right.

First, I agree to disagree on the use of Acts 28. We simply see that differently. However, you go on to assert that my position involves "the cultural and spiritual submission of women" reinforced by the suggestion that the alleged ‘proof-texting’ is done "in order to support a position that furthers oppression." Further, you say that such a position is “a form of fundamentalist persecution that I strongly reject and find repugnant in all its forms.” Though you rightly characterize my position as fundamentalist (not as the world would reckon fundamentalism), the idea of persecution by such is foreign to me, and though I don’t accept the notion, I’m prepared to agree to disagree. As you well know, the Scripture in no way recommends, suggests, requires or condones the oppression of women, either culturally, spiritually or by any other means, and NEITHER DO I. In my humble opinion, to read 'oppression' into the Scripture's use of 'submission' whether in reference to men or women, husbands or wives, etc., is a gross misread of which I would have no part in.

As to the perceived offenses… 1) “since I do not see it the way you see it, I am living in darkness.” 2) “What nerve to accuse those who have a saving faith in Jesus Christ of not being saved because they don't read things the way you do.” I have no sure way of knowing how you arrived at these interpretations of my words, but seeing that you have, please accept my sincerest apologies as my only intent towards you, the members of this board, man our brother and Christ our Redeemer, is Love. Though great pains are always taken to not offend, it does happen, and in every case I am most sorrowful as I intend quite the opposite result. As an example, I leave you with a difficult saying. Please do not take offense, but know that its intent is to build up.

Peace dear brother, the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you.

Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you-unless, of course, you fail the test? (2 Cor 13:5)

-- Anonymous, February 14, 2004