|
|
|
|
|
High-functioning Businesswoman
|
Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 12:52 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 1:57 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 7:29 am
![](//graphics.gaiaonline.com/images/s.gif) |
![](//graphics.gaiaonline.com/images/s.gif) |
![](//graphics.gaiaonline.com/images/s.gif) |
![](//graphics.gaiaonline.com/images/posts/say/say_b1_p.gif) |
Fushigi na Butterfly Well, reading the passage further, you come across this verse:
For this reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head.
This part of the passage I think is interesting. Is this to meant that the covering of a woman's head shows she has authority, or is it to show that there is someone with authority over her?
This is not a popular subject in modern times, but in the ancient world, and in some communities today, the woman was under the authority of her father or her husband. She did not act on her own authority in spiritual or in financial matters. That being said, being under Godly authority did not mean she was worthless, or unable to control her life. Look to the actions of Deborah, Esther, Ruth, and the woman mentioned in Proverbs as being more valuble than the price of rubies.
The context is that a woman with unshorn hair, which is her covering before the angels and God, is submissive to God's authority. While the woman with shorn (the word is actually cut) hair has put herself outside of Godly authority.
Likewise, a man who does not cut his hair has also placed himself outside of Godly authority (not counting those who have taken Nazarite vows).
|
![](//graphics.gaiaonline.com/images/s.gif) |
![](//graphics.gaiaonline.com/images/s.gif) |
![](//graphics.gaiaonline.com/images/s.gif) |
![](//graphics.gaiaonline.com/images/s.gif) |
|
![](//graphics.gaiaonline.com/images/template/s.gif) |
![](//graphics.gaiaonline.com/images/template/s.gif) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 25, 2009 11:33 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 29, 2009 7:48 pm
![](//graphics.gaiaonline.com/images/s.gif) |
![](//graphics.gaiaonline.com/images/s.gif) |
![](//graphics.gaiaonline.com/images/s.gif) |
![](//graphics.gaiaonline.com/images/posts/say/say_b1_p.gif) |
1 Corinthians 11:11-16 is quite telling on this issue:
1 Corinthians 11:11-16 NIV 11 In the Lord, however, 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.
Paul seems to start off in verses 11 and 12 to contradict what he has said in previous verses, stating the dependency of both sexes on one another and their equality under God. This undermines what he had previously said. He goes on to say that the Church has no other basis other than common practice, or "the very nature of things", upon which to judge the issue, so he is leaving it up to each member of the church to judge for themselves.
Also, verse 16 makes me want to rap some Run DMC.
|
![](//graphics.gaiaonline.com/images/s.gif) |
![](//graphics.gaiaonline.com/images/s.gif) |
![](//graphics.gaiaonline.com/images/s.gif) |
![](//graphics.gaiaonline.com/images/s.gif) |
|
![](//graphics.gaiaonline.com/images/template/s.gif) |
![](//graphics.gaiaonline.com/images/template/s.gif) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 29, 2009 11:37 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2009 12:30 pm
|
|
|
|
|
![](//graphics.gaiaonline.com/images/template/s.gif) |
|
|
|
|
|