Posted by: clevsea | January 12, 2008

headcovering is not cultural

Many times people will ask about or state that I Corr 11 (head
covering passage) is a cultural situation.

One of several answers is this. The second half of the very same
chapter deals with the Lord’s Supper–a passage that no one I’ve
ever heard of claimed to be cultural. Even the very important
teaching of “whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord
in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood of the
Lord. But let each man examine himself…” The teaching continues,
check I Cor 11:17-34. Churches do follow I Cor 11, at least the 2nd
part.

“That was then, this is now.” People bring up bits and pieces of
Jewish customs as a way of explaining “away” the need to cover or
uncover (whether male or female). Show people like that, if they are
open to hearing what you have to say, the maps normally provided at
the back of their Bible. Have them take a look at Corinth. How close
is it to Jerusalem? According to Acts many early churches contained
a mixture of people groups, Helenists, Jews, Greeks all of which had
the Gospel in common. If Paul was only speaking to one kind of
Christian he certainly had the intelligence (and guidance of the
Holy Spirit) to make that point clear to us. Paul saw himself as
sent to the Gentiles, yes he continued to speak at the Temples when
allowed, so when people bring up the Female’s role in Temple and
speak of Lattice Work, not being allowed to touch the Scriptures and
sitting in a separate area, teach them, if they are willing to hear,
where Corinth was located.

There’s much more but for brevity’s sake I’ll end with this. Read
FIRST Cor 5:9 “I wrote to you in my epistle not to keep company with
sexually immoral people.” Why does that matter? Well, this is First
Corinthians, how can Paul refer to an earlier epistle? You could
assume that Second Corinthians is the epistle he is indicating
however it is well documented and generally understood by Bible
scholars that the second letter did indeed come second. Therefore,
it is generally accepted by most if not all that we, the church,
have a “Lost” epistle.

The point? If God, our Father, our Maker is all-knowing, and He is,
then He could have very easily seen to it that the head covering
passage was written of in that other epistle (letter). If that had
been the case then Clevsea would not have ever read it and would
have at no time had to ponder it. I’m not anywhere near as
intelligent as God and even I with my very limited intellect could
have figured that out. If I didn’t want the Church in 2008 reading
and most likely obeying the head covering passage because it was
cultural I would have omited it from canonization.

“Let brotherly love continue.” Heb 13:1 Clevsea

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: