welcome...
Welcome to Lazarusunbound.com, preaching and teaching the Sovereign Grace Doctrines of the Holy Bible. We hope you are benefited by the free materials made available to you on this site.
featured article...
By Michael Bunker
editor@lazarusunbound.com
Want to discuss it? Try the Forum
Previous parts in this series:
Headcoverings, or The Veil, Part 1
Headcoverings,
or The Veil, Part 2
A Sermon,
Preached on the
Second Day
In
SANTA ANNA
March 12, 2008
Every man
praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his
head. But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head
uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she
were shaven. For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn:
but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be
covered. For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as
he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the
man. For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man.
Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.
For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of
the angels. (1Co 11:4-10)
We
have shown in the previous part that it was the almost universal
practice of women of every culture represented in Corinth when this
epistle was written, to cover their heads in some manner. And we
have made a point of showing that Paul's intent was NOT that women
would cover themselves during prayer or worship – as if it were
acceptable (or even a common practice) for them to go uncovered at
other times. Neither the context, nor a thorough review of the
history, society, and culture allows that interpretation (though I
have heard it many, many times from modernist preachers). Rather,
Paul was making the point that a woman ought not to uncover
herself during prayer and public worship, as was being done by some
who had adopted that practice from the pagans. This point, I
believe, is where the greatest misunderstandings and deceptions occur
in relation to this verse. Please make note of that, and pray about
it in your own study of the issue. Out of ignorance of the context,
the writing style, and the prevailing culture, many have come to the
conclusion that Paul was making a sociological argument – or a
cultural one, even though in his introduction to this chapter, Paul
places this discourse in the arena of absolute ordinances that he
expects the people to obey and keep. Further, he raises the bar even
further by making the argument that a woman ought to have “power”
(or the veil, or covering) on her head “because of the
angels”. We will discuss more about what this statement
means particularly in the proper place, but we need to note that Paul
nowhere appeals to the culture or to the practice of the surrounding
peoples. Had he done so, the liberals (on this issue) would still
fail in proving their point, since it is evident by a thorough study
of the time, that the Greek women, the Roman women, and the Hebrew
women all (with very few exceptions) wore headcoverings, and, as we
showed in the first part, this convention was practiced by all
Biblical cultures even into our very day. It has been abandoned
quite recently, and we did discuss how this abandonment came about.
Instead, however, Paul based his argument on universal truths, such
as spiritual order, authority, and on nature – all things that
are not changed, altered, abolished, or affected by time, place,
practice, or culture. It would be quite a ridiculous argument for
the liberal to state that at one point angels (either good or bad)
might be affected by the woman being uncovered, but that now
“Angel-culture” has developed to the point that a woman
being uncovered no longer has the same affect. In any case, as we
have said, Paul does not rest his argument on such silly and
changeable ground. He builds his argument on a much more permanent
foundation – that a woman ought to be veiled:
..
read the entire article

|