14 Objections to the Head Covering Answered - Daniel Willis

[@virginiarogers9564]

Great explanation!! The church resists it. I wish I could find a church that embraces this beautiful truth!!

[@wandah9468]

Well, if you mean the Catholic church, they didn't resist it. The church wisely decided to stay out of the argument and "abrogate" the issue. So, basically, it was left to the ladies. As it should be, guys! Do we tell you what kind of underwear you should wear in church??

[@RandallvanOosten-ln5wf]

I was raised in the 50s and 60s and saw the cultural change in the church. In the mid-50s it was normal for my mother and sister to wear a simple hat to church. This was in a Protestant context. Years later I attended seminary thinking head coverings were a cultural relic of the past. However, I did a paper on 1Corinthians 11 and was shocked to realize that Paul's reasoning was not cultural at all. I presented this to my class. Needless to say, no one agreed with me, yet they could not dispute my reasoning nor Paul's reasoning. Since that time, I literally thought I was the only Protestant Evangelical who believed head coverings are commanded in Scripture. I am now heartened to see there is a revival of interest in this.

[@wandah9468]

I'm happy to do my part to normalize a scarf on a woman! Glad the younger generation is joining in! Don't overthink the religious aspects, it's a simple act of respect. Respect for the Lord, as well as self respect.

[@sodaomgi7233]

Religion has covered your head. How sad 😢

[@shloppyshmo]

I love that I can hear the cheers and squeals of children in the background! Keep em in the church and train them young!

[@1lost_sheep]

I was thinking the exact same thing!

[@Finny_finn_finn]

I have been a Christian my entire life...but I have never been taught modesty, long hair, or head coverings...and I have read the Bible cover to cover and it never triggered me to question why I wasn't taught those things. I have recently, within the last year or so, began my modest dressing journey...learning as much as I can. I have found many old family photos where the women dress modestly and they have a covering, but I just took it as fashion statements. What I would genuinely like to know now is, what is considered a head covering? When can you uncover your head, and what do I do in the privacy of my own home and when I go to bed?

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@Finny_finn_finn That's a great question. There have been different ways of head covering throughout Christian history. Women in our community typically wear a cloth veil that covers most of their hair. Some women wear head coverings to bed and some don't always. The main principle we would point to is that we want to be ready to pray or prophesy at any time. Scripture doesn't give us an explanation of exactly how we should do it, but it does give us some clear principles. Hope this is helpful. -Lynn

[@rjstephan]

I appreciate your sincere questions. My conscience is definitely fine with not covering for bedtime, though I do keep a covering nearby when I pray outloud with my husband. I feel silent prayer in my own head is not the same as public or apparent prayer. God knows our hearts. He doesn't need to see a physical sign to hear our prayers. The physical covering is for mankind and the angels to see. Only God knows our thoughts, not the angels, not anyone else. So silent prayer in bed, in the shower, etc is between me and God and does not require a covering at those times. Hope this makes sense! When you keep the context of scripture, I firmly believe it's addressing prayer and worship in public, not when in your bed.

[@sodaomgi7233]

Modesty is about balance and avoiding extremes. Simply covering your hair doesn't reflect true modesty; it is merely "covering your head." Additionally, using head coverings in religious practices often lacks biblical support and can be linked to cultic or pagan traditions.

[@iKnowlestheTruth]

Thank you for this video! The Bible is replete with symbolism-the head covering is a lovely outward expression of the Creation Order. I’ve been covering for worship since 2015. The only one in my small reformed baptist church. ❤️ blessings from Virginia!

[@wifeoftim]

@KnowlestheTruth God bless you for being obedient. I'm the only one in my Baptist church too!

[@starsis6]

My daughter & I are the only ones in my church.

[@lanakuhns5257]

It's a blessing to be encouraged to wear a head covering. I always find it a bit ironic that the subjects that people insist are not important enough to care about, are often the subjects that meet the most resistance when they are encouraged to be practiced or studied in a new way.

[@clintonjameshuddleston-apo9385]

Amen

[@TheFirstLoveClub]

Best response to this topic ever 😏

[@NilsWeber-mb5hg]

PRAISE GOD

[@JesusLightsYourPath]

So many people are against it that I feel scared to do it but I did it for 2 days so far. I was saved in February and I just became aware of 1st Corinthians 11 yesterday.

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@I am a child of God Following God isn't easy, but it's worth it! -Lynn

[@robertmiller812]

Just follow God no need to overthink things. Let the Lord guide you and not a religious group.

[@defendingthegospel721]

Study the scriptures carefully and note the context not just certain words, check verses 13-15 and ask what is the subject.

[@EternaLivesMatter]

God bless you sweet sister! I am so happy that you have been saved. Praise the Lord Jesus Christ!

[@JohnYoder-vi1gj]

1st Cor. 11:15

[@thatgirlyanara]

Thank you so much for this video! I started asking YAH about head covering a year ago and I can say now that I was ignoring His signs but it’s something that kept me uncomfortable especially when people would compliment my hair, I then decided to head cover but only when praying and realized I pray a lot more than I thought and putting the cover and taking it off all the time started to seem wrong!Later on I realized that the reason I had delayed head covering was because of vanity cause I kept trying to find a “fashionable” way to head cover but still show off my hair instead of being focused on obeying and glorifying our Heavenly Father I then repent and realized my beauty is in my obedience! To solidify all of this one day I just didn’t cover at all and when I went to sleep I had a dream that I know for sure wasn’t from YAHUAH( I am a person who are constantly receiving dreams from YAHUAH) and I realized I was uncovered! Ever since head covering was clear to me and I stopped disobeying YAHUAH! Crazy thing is now that I head cover full time I feel so much more beautiful as before I felt that I need my hair to feel beautiful, my skin glows and I get so much more revelation and understanding! This is truly a way to align with YAHUAH’s will for us!

[@MexIndio1]

That's awesome. Is your husband okay with it, too? My hubby really loves it. He said it puts a smile on his face. I'm 1 of 2 women who wears a head covering at church. I also wear it full time at home. 🥰 Congratulations!!

[@Redeemed12]

Thanks for your testimony! Just wanted to ask: do you wear a head covering to sleep? I often pray in bed as I got to sleep, after I’ve removed my covering. And tonight I felt so convicted to cover up as I prayed for the sake of protection in the spiritual realm. But I don’t know how to do this without being uncomfortable during the night! Any advice or tips would be welcome! Also, how much hair do you think should be covered? All except a little at the forehead? Can I wear some hair out? I’m a single, adult woman. What do other women do?

[@thatgirlyanara]

@@MexIndio1 hi sister! I am not married but I know that head covering will be one of the things my husband will love because it’s surely a sign that I am willing and eager not only to submit but to cover him! I pray you stay encouraged sister in head covering and that because of your obedience and reverence for YAHUAH many come to the same understanding!

[@thatgirlyanara]

@@Redeemed12 all praise, honor and glory to YAHUAH my sister 🙌🏽 I wear satin bonet to sleep! I pray in bed, fall asleep praying, Abba wakes me up sometimes and I sometimes just pray right there( I have a toddler so I can’t always get off the bed) so I understand what you are saying! I have a hard time sleeping with anything on my head even a Bobby pin but the bonet has been ok especially because it’s not tight! As far as how much hair should be covered and if you can leave hair out I believe it depends: when I started this journey I was always trying to leave some hair out because of what I now know is my vanity so I started covering completely! Today I sometimes leave some hair out like a few curls by the ears and to frame my face but my main focus is to make sure my whole head is covered! I do a lot of head wraps as well as I am african and it’s just easier for me! My sister at the end of the day all women can tell you what they do but my advice is: pray about it! YAHUAH will guide you like He guided me and the rest of us who headcover now! He was so gentil and patient with me and I know He will do the same with anyone that honestly want to do nothing but His will! As I type this scripture is strong in my heart: “But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to Elohim must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.” Hebrew 11:6

[@MexIndio1]

@@thatgirlyanara, you're so sweet! Thank you, sis. I pray that you find a husband soon, in Yahs name we pray. You will make a great wife. You should consider the Orthodox Christian Churches. You will find a husband there. Orthodoxy is the first religion started in Egypt and Ethiopia. It's the traditions that Jesus followed. ♥️

[@erika815]

I'm actually going to do a lesson on my Instagram about headcovering. I mentioned an etsy shop on my social media wear I buy headcovering and I had a few friends (that go to other churches) message me asking if I also cover. We talked for awhile but both other women try to hide it so they won't be judged. I myself have gotten in trouble at my church because I cover. It's really sad that as women we feel like we need to hide the fact that we cover by wearing trendy hats and not talking about it. I don't necessarily want to draw attention to it (all glory belongs to God) but I'm also not ashamed.

[@wandagutierrez5338]

I actually stopped wearing my hats, which became a vast collection, because a hat isn’t making a statement in church as I think it should. I was not trying to be trendy with the hats but not being offensive to my sisters. But they know now, have pointedly asked why I was suddenly wearing a head covering, but they aren’t interested at least right now. I do feel that a veil is the more proper way to cover.

[@cindylott6540]

You did such an excellent teaching. Thank you. I was studying this on my own, to not be swayed one way or the other. I wrote a list of questions, and you answered them. Thank you.

[@peteryee4630]

Thank you for discussing these controversies which are on the minds of many Christians. The cultural setting is important, and Daniel Willis had highlighted the possibility of influence from Grecian pagan practices besides other cultural matters relating to the use of head coverings. There may, however, also be contentions coming from the Jewish converts in the church. We see that Paul started in v.2 by praising the church for keeping “firmly to the traditions” he gave them, which would likely include the use of head coverings by men and women while ministering in church. We note that Paul was also dealing with a number of other issues pertaining to the order of worship. It could be that some had actually turned away from the proper use of head coverings to follow other practices, or that Paul was actually giving them a biblical basis for the tradition, because certain members were unhappy with his views (see v.16) and therefore wanted the practice stopped. If so, who could they be? Could it be the women? Well, the women would likely want to be covered, which offered protection and distinguished them from those others disallowed from veiling, like the prostitutes, etc. Could it be the men who wanted the women uncovered to expose their beauty? Well, we note that Paul also covered the incorrect practices of the men, and furthermore, only a handful of women were required to cover up, and only during the short duration of time when they engaged in the public ministry of prayer and prophecy. It is most likely, I believe, that it was the Jews (both men and women) that WANTED the use of head coverings reinstated congregation-wide and (for the women) at all times, since Paul had only expected their use only when ministering in the congregation. This pushback is primarily because head coverings for the Jews provided them cover for their shame when meeting with God, and for the women, this covering of shame was even a greater than the idea of their general submission to ALL men. Paul’s teaching on head coverings here, is a New Testament teaching based on the principle of biblical headship, not that of the old Jewish practice of shame and subjection (for women), for biblical headship was never a part of the creation accounts in Genesis 1 -3 as assumed. Paul taught in v.3, “But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.” Christ was not specifically mentioned in Genesis, much less the symbol of Him being the head of every man (plural), which came only as a result of man’s personal spiritual union with Him. Note also that the man is the head of A woman (singular) which is entirely different from the then Jewish understanding that women are generally in subjection to ALL men (through veiling). Here, the specific teaching is, one man is only the head of one woman (Gal 5.23 “For the husband is the head of the wife,” not one man being the head of all woman, and a woman therefore is not expected to treat any or all other man (besides her husband) as her head. There are mutual obligations in marriage and consequently only married women need veiling to cover the head of her husband when performing public ministry. A right understanding of biblical headship leads to v.7, “For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man.” Christ, who is Himself the cover (e.g. for sins) must not be covered, and women, in upholding and honoring God through ministry cannot be honoring man (their husbands) at the same time and therefore their heads must be covered. It is therefore absolutely clear for the Jewish men to not use the Kippah (or skull cap) to cover their shame in worship, since they have already been redeemed to stand before the Throne of Grace. The teaching is also clear for the women so far, but Paul then introduced a chiastic structure for v.7 to 13, with the middle verse (10) taking the prominent spot. It works like this: proceed from 7 to 8 to 9, like climbing up a Jacob’s Ladder and over the top and down, taking into consideration the matching verses, i.e., matching 7 with 13, then, moving up, matching 8 with 12, then, 9 with 11, and, reaching verse 10, taking the most prominent spot. So we have: 7. For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. 8. For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man; 9. for indeed man was not created for the woman’s sake, but woman for the man’s sake. 10. Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. 11. However, in the Lord, neither is woman independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. 12. For as the woman originates from the man, so also the man has his birth through the woman; and all things originate from God. 13. Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? Note: From v 11 onwards, we have "However, IN THE LORD." Based on this phrase, this new reality, every previous disadvantage for the woman from the fall has been reversed. As the woman moves in from verse 9 (and v11) towards verse 10, we have "therefore" (because of the reversals in the Lord), the woman ought to have authority ("a symbol of" is not in the original text, which was added by the Bible translators), i.e., the woman now has authority on HER own head (note, it is no longer the man's or her husband's head). As she steps down, she has the authority to decide what she wants to do with HER head. This new reality happens because in Church only Christ is the Head, and there are no intermediaries. So, He is the head both of men and women, not men and, through men to the woman. On this account, rather than saying “a woman ought not” as in verse 7, he issued a rhetorical question (expecting “no”) asking, “Judge for yourself …” And this question is directed both to the woman and the man confronted with this issue of woman head coverings in the new order of things. This is a choice for her to make based on conscience and her level of maturity like in what he taught in 1 Cor 10:23, “All things are lawful, but not all things are profitable. All things are lawful, but not all things edify.” Paul was gracious in not forcing the issues, since both the principle of biblical headship and the new realities in Christ are both “lawful.” This is one of the paradoxes (not contradictions) that Christians must accept. Should we then force the issue either way? Not without care, and therefore it requires leaders teaching the right things to encourage right conduct that truly pleases the Lord. I think this is an alternative view worth thinking about. Thank you.

[@reflectionsinthebible3579]

I will admit that thinking about going out and being different covering my head again does get to me a little. I think it’s that way for most of us actually on some level. I don’t mind being different once I’m out and about - just part of me does dread it a little thinking about how I’m going about looking different before I go out or thinking about it sometimes. You feel a little of the pressure in your mind of having to be different -meaning not one of the rest of the women. Also, knowing my oldest daughter really seems as if she will never cover when she’s older and that makes me feel that out of place feeling thinking about it.

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@Reflections in the Bible It's definitely not an easy thing! God bless. -Lynn

[@reflectionsinthebible3579]

@@SoundFaithChannel 💕

[@susanalday4368]

It pleases God. Im new on this walk as well but we are to obey God rather than men. Don"t worry about what others think, you don't need their approval, only God's. And we are to expect being looked at differently because we are to be set apart. God bless you.

[@BasedZoomer]

That's part of my worry about it, but also the nature of being commanded to dress modestly. While sexual modesty is good, I worry about coming off as prideful, flashy, or holier than thou and therefore immodest not in a sexual way, but in a spiritual way.

[@HarpazoReady2022]

1 Corinthians 11:15 tells me as a female my long hair is my covering and is a glory. So as a Christian, I don’t have to wear a head covering to reach Christ or be presentable to a congregation like false religions require like Islam and Hindus or cults like Catholicism. Think about the religions and cults that DO mandate female head coverings. It’s legalistic and the Church is not under the Mosaic Law. We’re under Grace and nothing can be ADDED to what Jesus did on the cross to put a barrier between Him and me 💜

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@HarpazoReady2022 You may not be aware, but the idea that long hair is the covering is a relatively recent idea. Since the beginning, Christians who have natively spoken Biblical Greek have realized that Paul is simply making an analogy to prove that one should wear a cloth head covering, not saying that the hair is what he has been speaking of all along. In fact, Paul even uses a different Greek word to say that the hair is a covering (peribolaion) than he uses when speaking of a covering throughout the passage (katakalypto). -Lynn

[@HarpazoReady2022]

@@SoundFaithChannel Ok, I wasn’t aware 1 Corinthians 11 was written recently. I thought it was written by Paul in the 1st century around 55-60 A.D. 1 Corinthians 11:15 “BUT if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: *for her hair is given her for a covering.”* That’s not an “idea” as you said. That’s scripture. Hair is the covering. The original Greek states literal hair. We don’t spiritualize or allegorize this. If Paul wanted to do that, he would have said “LIKE hair.” 1 Corinthians 11 explains men don’t wear head coverings & a woman’s hair IS her covering. Verse 16 explains man may disagree with that, but Paul states *we have no such CUSTOM, neither the Churches of God.* This ends the debate. You may disagree, but God has the final say. Jewish Law requires head coverings for both men & women. And Paul was telling them they no longer have to do that as a Christian. The Church has no such custom. This is why Jewish men today wear a kippah. They’re practicing Jews under Mosaic Law- under the Torah. But Jesus came & fulfilled the Law (Matthew 5:17). They aren’t Christian’s. So I wear my “head covering” everywhere I go with my long hair. Stop being legalistic over females because Christ isn’t. I don’t follow the culture. I’m not Jewish. I’m not Islamic. I’m not Catholic. I’m not a Mennonite. I follow what the Lord says in His Word. My hair IS my head covering. Since you want to make an analogy out of this verse to fit it in with the culture, you apparently take an eisegesis approach to scripture, which means you read into it what it doesn’t say. I take the exegesis approach of taking *from* scripture. This explains why you have no videos on the Harpazo of the church, Christ’s 1,000-year earthly rule and reign during His upcoming Kingdom on earth or Gods plan of salvation for Israel in the last days. God Bless 🌸

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@HarpazoReady2022 My point is that, just because a particular interpretation may seem like a possible interpretation to someone two millennia after the Bible was written doesn't mean that it's a good one. Before we come to conclusions about the meaning of a particular ancient Greek term or passage, it's good to research what native speakers of the language, who lived during that historical time period, heard when they read the passage. -Lynn

[@reflectionsinthebible3579]

It’s about being humble before God. Our hair is our glory so we are to cover our glory before God to give God all the glory. And even when we give an answer for our faith, that too is a form of worship or prophesy or teaching.

[@Repent.Believe.obeyJesus]

I pray your strength in the Lord , my wife is rebellious to this command aswell she is a babe in Christ,

[@coralmclaughlin9864]

When I was a young girl, I’m now 64 years old. We were not allowed to go to church without our heads covered, I wore a hat. My gran would never go out the front door without having a scarf or a hat on. That was in the 60’s early 70’s. It might be because we’re country folk. I don’t know what it was like in the cities.

[@doriesse824]

I grew up in a big city during the 50s and 60s. It was the same as you describe.

[@wandagutierrez5338]

I did not hear a part about why to cover full time. The passage nearly everywhere is translated as when praying and prophesying in public worship, not personal. When I pray out running around I don’t pray aloud or if I do I’m in my car alone. I don’t see this as a need to cover. I’m still not sure I understand the reason for covering other than because Gos said so, but still say all the time to my understanding.

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@Wanda Gutierrez Great question. My question would be, where does this passage say that it is only for public worship? We encourage our women to wear a head covering regularly to be ready to pray and prophesy at any time. I hope this helps. -Lynn

[@tjharmon891]

Because we are to pray at all times

[@blessedrthosesermount99]

We're to pray without ceasing. So, cover all the time.

[@ranbran2948]

I think the question is fair, and one that deserves an answer. Pray without ceasing and pray at all times, certainly is not saying that with every breath and every muscle twitch, to be in prayer. Proof texting in such a way, is what challenges credibility in any argument.

[@reflectionsinthebible3579]

No. It’s not because of the fallen angels. It’s because the angels (see Revelations) cover their heads before God and we should follow suit.

[@sierraaronson5611]

Thank you for these videos. If you do not mind my asking, which denomination are you?

[@someoneveryclever]

Sierra, their denomination is Conservative Anabaptist, which includes Conservative Mennonites, Dunkard Brethren, etc.

[@randihubbard1352]

Precious babies in the background ❤

[@randihubbard1352]

Thank you so much!! I just started covering (I don’t know anyone else who does) and was so overjoyed to find this!!

[@abeldab7210]

God bless you so much. You may not be cheered on by men, but God is pleased with your obedience.

[@scottpalmer829]

I appreciate you discussion of this topic but would like to challenge some of what you are saying Chrysostom withstanding, it does seem clear that Paul is tying the covering to praying and or prophesying (cf. vv. 5 and 13). If the veil were to be worn at all times, would not Paul had clearly stated so? One would think that he would have said something like, "Every woman with he head uncovered dishonoureth her head.". I don't know why Paul would say in verse 15 that, ". . . her hair is given her for a covering." if the covering is not hair. I actually think that the preceding verses can be interpreted with hair being the covering, given that the Greek words indicate something thrown around. A woman could have short hair but not be shaven in which case Paul would be saying that she might just as well be shorn given that both are inappropriate. I would be very careful to not tie something like a hair covering to salvation; this is creating a works based salvation.

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@Scott Palmer Great points. The reason we'd encourage our sisters to wear their head coverings when in public is that we want them to be ready to pray/prophesy anytime. Also, that seems to have been the practice of the early church. The interpretation that Paul is talking about hair is a recent interpretation that has a lot of problems. One is that Paul uses a different Greek word when calling hair a "covering." We have a bit of a different perspective on things that might not be salvation issues. We believe that it's a problem when Christians disobey Scripture because they (rightly or wrongly) believe that the specific command won't lose them their salvation. That seems too much like a husband flirting with other women because he knows that it won't cause his wife to divorce him, and only refraining from actual adultery because he knows that she would divorce him because of that. It's an attitude that we don't want to encourage. God bless. -Lynn

[@scottpalmer829]

@@SoundFaithChannel I don't know anyone who disobeys God because they believe that they cannot lose their salvation but even as believers we sin and are capable of sinning.

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@@scottpalmer829 You're right that we do all fall at times. However, just remember that I was saying that in context of obeying a biblical command. Any rationale for disobeying a biblical command seems a bit concerning, as I'm sure you agree. -Lynn

[@JesusMyLove14]

Thanks for the logical discussion. All scripture should be examined and made sure one is not reading more into what it is saying.

[@JohnYoder-vi1gj]

Amen. Ephesians 2:8-9

[@SamuelPeterJoseph]

At the 31:55 you say it's terrifying to imagine demons or bad angels lusting after women who are uncovered, but what about when women have to shower or when they're intimate with their husband, won't bad angels lust after them even more so? So if its a terrifying thought for a woman to have her hair uncovered how much more terrifying is it for when they shower or get dressed. My wife and I accept what scripture says about head coverings, but we don't think it has anything to do with bad angels lusting after them.

[@izabelak2800]

Great points! Totally agree!

[@marius79fp]

Many empty words

[@SoundFaithChannel]

?

[@PowersFamily2011]

Amen brothers! 100% Biblical truth. The King of all Creation, who Created all things, speaks and we listen.

[@lluda44]

Not 100% not the part about angels and Genesis 6.

[@PowersFamily2011]

@ludadubinetsky7079 care to give us the correct interpretation?

[@lluda44]

@@PowersFamily2011 yes, this thing about Angels marrying women, is absurd and fairly new idea. The correct way to go about Genesis 6 is: Those who call upon the name of the Lord are the godly. They are the children of God. This is why the men from Seth's lineage are called the sons of God. The women were Cain s daughters, and were ungodly (earthly). Spiritually minded and earthly minded started to mingle. God is against that, as we see with the children of Israel, and from the commandments in the new testament. In the begining, Caine and the other sons of Adam lived apart, but when time passes and the population expanded, their boundaries came together. Seth's sons began to see that Cains women were beautiful (make up), and started doing what displeased the Lord, untill Cains women corrupted Seth's line. Had it not been for the flood, probably not one human would have been left uncorrupted. Satan had a plant to destroy the line from which Jesus could ultimately come. God didn't allow it. Is that satisfactory?

[@lluda44]

@@PowersFamily2011 angels were not created to procreate.

[@PowersFamily2011]

@ludadubinetsky7079 got it. I was mainly referring to the main premise about head coverings being correct. Thank you for the explanation. That makes much more sense.

[@jerrydeangarber5494]

1 Cor 11:15c. answer this one. for her hair is given her for a covering.

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@FA We rarely ban people from commenting on this channel, because we want to be able to have constructive conversations with people on Scriptural topics. However, sometimes we do ban people for exactly that reason--they're making it difficult to have constructive conversations. We're banning you, not because we aren't willing for you to share your opinion (we are very willing to hear it), but because you're trying very hard to proselytize commenters on this channel to your point of view. Unfortunately, your view is not supported by Scripture or history, so when you post it constantly under the comments of Christians who are trying to seek the original Christian faith, it is not helpful to them. You made some very valid critiques of how some churches practice the head covering, and I hope that those churches will take note of such critiques. However, I regret to say that you'll need to post them elsewhere. God bless you, @FA, and I hope you can find a group of people to fellowship with who are not hypocritical and who follow the Bible entirely. - Lynn

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@Jerry Dean Garber This is a very good question. Here's how we'd reply: The word katakalypto, which is the word used for "to cover" throughout the passage, does not mean hair. In the verse where Paul says that a woman's hair is a covering, he uses a completely different word, peribolaion. If Paul meant to say that a woman's hair performs the function of katakalypto, then why does he say that it's a peribolaion? I am aware of no evidence whatsoever that katakalypto can mean long hair in Greek. There's a reason why all reputable Bible translations translate it "cover." A thoughtful Evangelical has covered this view. I recommend this video by Mike Winger: kzbin.info/www/bejne/oZa7kqymbK-LnJY I don't agree with quite everything about his view, but he shows clearly what katakalypto means. The early Christians, native speakers of Koine Greek who grew up steeped in the teachings of the apostles, just a few decades or a few hundred years after the apostles taught, considered it a cloth covering If we aren't convinced yet, Paul says that all the churches had the practice/tradition that he was talking about. So we can look at what the early church was doing, to see what Paul was talking about. The early church taught that women should wear head coverings--that was the practice that all the churches were doing: kzbin.info/www/bejne/pZfPhoqCe72snKs Hope this helps -Lynn

[@robertmiller812]

A good verse indeed something one should look deeply into.

[@leighgarrett285]

Once I started studying & researching hair covering, it became obvious just how much womens hair is a sensual tool...for my generation it was Farrah Fawcet, her hair was a big deal, in masses women & girls had their hair cut like hers and the root reason for this happening was to be sexy like her and therefore, to attract men & boys to us luring them in through our & their sexuality.

[@brihilton]

An older relative of mine constantly told me to get a man I must grow out my hair and flip it when I am talking to them. That way to get their attention. She was married sometime in the 40s or 50s so even then this was important.

[@Omatimestwo]

Yea, no. Every part of a woman is sensual to a man. One of the reasons certain religions make their women completely cover up. Women are not responsible for a man’s lustful thoughts.

[@owamuhmza]

Very encouraging. Thank you 🙏🏼

[@christfollower221]

THANK YOU FOR THE TRUTH!! ❤ May God continue to bless you with sharing the truth

[@michaelbarger3665]

to assume the “sons of God” were fallen angels, is a complete contradiction. and if you read genesis chapters 1-6, it has no mention of angels. it only speaks of men populating the earth. the sons of God were people like Adam, Noah, Enoch, etc. those who lived 800 years or more. to believe demons mated with humans or spirit mated with flesh and made a soul, which is created only under Gods order, is a demonic belief. unfortunately, i see this belief being spread all too often.

[@gundog4273]

The arguments against head coverings are many. They don't agree with each other. They can be disproven. The argument for is in the scripture. After taking the time to try to disprove my call to cover this is the ultimate reasoning I have found.

[@CH-gn7rf]

Been headcovering for about 13 years.... not mennonite or anything. But love YHWH ❤

[@randihubbard1352]

Rewatching to take notes and explain my head-covering conviction. Thanks!!!

[@BasicBiblicalTruth]

Paul employs a chiasm[1] in his presentation of seven reasons why, during assembly meetings, men are to be bareheaded and women are to have their heads covered: A. Apostolic tradition: the mandate is part of the Apostolic body of truth to be observed (v. 2). B. Theological: special revelation of God’s ordered headship calls for it (v. 3). C. Sociological: people are watching (vv. 4-6). D. Biblical: the creation story in Genesis teaches God’s divine order (vv. 7-12). C′. Celestial: angels are watching (v. 10). B′. Natural: general revelation of divine order and common custom call for it (vv. 13-15). A′. Apostolic community: this was the practice of the universal Apostolic community (the church), not a Pauline preference (v. 16). Paul frames his argument at the distal ends with the universal Apostolic tradition and Apostolic communities, and at the apex, the heart of his argument is the created order. His arguments from outside-in are transtemporal and transcultural. This means that Paul's mandate for BOTH men to be uncovered AND for women to be covered is applicable today. In Western culture today, the general impression (at least among those who have been influenced by Christianity, which may include Christians and non-Christians) is that this is a teaching for women only, which is simply not true. Just as many cities in the West are multicultural, so too, Corinth was a multicultural city. Look around at your city today, do you see men who cover their heads for religious reasons? Muslims, Jews, Sikh, etc? In Corinth, some men covered their heads for religious reasons too. No one in the first century would have been shocked by Paul telling women to cover their heads, even among those who normally would not cover their heads during religious worship. But Paul's mandate for ALL men to keep their head's uncovered would have been shocking to Romans and possibly to Jews. Paul's mandate is clear. In the cultic gathering of Christians (Church meetings), men are to uncover their heads and women are to cover them. This is ONLY for church meetings. The mandate is clear, the meaning of the mandate over the centuries has proved to be less clear. However, I think that meaning of the mandate has to do with God's order of creation. In Gen 3, humans rejected God's divine order, Adam forsook God and listened to Eve,[2] and Even listened to a creature instead of Adam (they were to rule over creation, not be ruled by it). Having been made new creatures, the question that arises is: Will these people submit to God's order or will they be like their parents and reject it? Together, the uncovered head of the man and the covered head of the woman proclaim that this new community of new creation (the church), unlike the old creation (Adam and Eve), submit to God's divine order. This enacted parable only works when all the men in the church are uncovered and all the women in the church have a head covering. It becomes very obvious to the observer that there is something symbolic going on, in the same way there is something symbolic with baptism and the Lord's supper. Unfortunately, since the mid-1900s, many churches have abandoned Paul's mandate, assuming that it was purely cultural. [1] Regardless if one sees a chaism in this chapter, the heart of Paul's argument is creation. [2] Listening to your wife is a good thing. She will often have insight that eludes men. The issue is listening to your wife when it is at the expense of what God has said.

[@doonagoding6146]

Wondering if it’s something God honors ( Headcovering) there are quite a few very sincere Christian women even here in USA. Why aren’t more getting the same “ message” that they need to cover ( at least during prayer, etc). Wouldn’t more true believers be embracing this?

[@wendymtzc]

Because many don’t believe head coverings are biblical

[@glennrobinson7193]

Shows me how mentally sick the church is to make an argument for a piece of cloth when the argument should be for loving thy neighbour and for brotherly and kind affection and caring for one another within the household of God.

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@glennrobinson7163 We argue for both of those Scriptural commands on this channel! Feel free to subscribe! -Lynn

[@glennrobinson7193]

@@SoundFaithChannel Love is not a command. Religion sees love one another as a judiciary type of a command. The Lord is not a hard taskmaster. The wicked SERVANT the religious person who receives one talent hides it as he sees his lord as a hard man who reaps where he does not sow. Jesus said to HIS disciples I call you not servants but friends. Therefore he is not their Commander in chief but a friend and our brother.

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@glennrobinson7193 "A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another." (John 13:34 ESV) -Lynn Love is a command. That doesn't mean that Jesus is a hard taskmaster. It's not a harsh command to tell someone that they must love, or that they must cover or uncover their heads. -Lynn

[@fitforfaith]

Great teaching. 1. Thank you especially for the insight regarding Adam Clarke. His lie becomes obvious through Genesis 38:15, where the same verb (G2619 ΚΑΤΑΚΑΛΥΠΤΕΤΑΙ) is used as in 1Cor 11, stating that prostitutes covered their face which obviously implies the top of the head as the support for the face covering. We would have long ago identified that lie if we would not have stopped using the Greek OT as handed over to us by CHRIST. Gen 38:15 "And when Judas saw her, he thought her to be a harlot; for she covered [Strong's G2619 ΚΑΤΑΚΑΛΥΠΤΕΤΑΙ, katakaluptetai, From G2596 and G2572; to cover wholly, that is, veil: - cover, hide] her face, and he knew her not." 2. But it comes close to legalism to add to the Bible to wear head coverings all the time. The speaker only provides a personal experience and another believer (Chrysostom) as reason, but lacks a biblical justification for this assumption. With the same logic, men would never be allowed to wear anything on their head. 3. Evil angels are probably not being meant, because we are not anymore in times where women are being abused through those. Angels rather refer to the prayers they receive and then are brought before Him, essentially providing a woman the same access to the Heavenly than a man has without head covering, by elevating the authority of a woman towards angels in those moments of prayer. See Mat 18:3-10, Luk 1:13, Rev 8:3-4, 1Tim 5:21 More biblical arguments (6 in total) for head coverings are found in the study on my website.

[@zoeboer9470]

I where no 2 weeks head coffering. And I am the only wan in y Church. And the only Christian in the region. And the only wan in my famely. And in my country there are a los of immigrants from moslims country. And most people are sik and tyerd of the moslims. And in Iran the wonen Who died for taken of her had coffering. So nobody understands me. But I whil where my had coffering. For the Lord.

[@dellRussell-dl1qt]

Im not saying its wrong in the interpretation of verse 16 as you and others state, "no other churches are being continuous, so you shouldn't be. " my paraphrasing of course. I don't see Paul telling them not to be continuous because no other church is, i see Paul making them do some self examination. Its kinda like when Jesus was telling his disciples that one of them was going to betray him, then they started asking, "Is it me Lord, am i the one?" We must remember that one of the main reasons Paul wrote this letter is because the church in Corinthian was being continuous! We see that in the first chapter. Therefore by him pointing out that some seem to be continuous it caused them to do some self examination. "Is it me Paul, am i the one being continuous?" Furthermore if they want to continue being continuous about this then it doesn't matter then we don't have any such custom. Just disregard everything I said and it doesn't matter. Paul was getting to the heart of the matter. Just my thoughts on that verse.

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@dellRussel-dl1qt Paul prefaces the section by highlighting the importance of following the teachings the apostles had handed down, and he is very adamant throughout this passage about the truth of what he's saying. So I don't think it fits well to suggest that he ends up by saying, "But it's okay to ignore this." Instead, I think it makes the most sense to interpret that verse to mean that anyone who is contentious with what he's presenting has no apostolic tradition and no church to back him up. Because the teaching/tradition of the apostles is this head covering teaching. -Lynn

[@paeppchen3970]

Hello Brother, I agree with your teaching, but there are on group that takes the head coverings series, and these are the Amish and meno items, who wearing hc for hundreds of years

[@SoundFaithChannel]

You're absolutely right! We're an Anabaptist church where Daniel and his family have found fellowship after searching for this. -Lynn

[@hannahdavia8791]

Thank you so much for this. I just love that you quote the Church Fathers 🙏

[@MosesGrace-f8e]

How would a Berean validate this teaching? By searching the Tanakh for agreement. However, your position is found in neither Torah nor the Prophets.

[@GaryDisciple]

Thanks for this message! Although I agree with your position about head coverings & think everyone should practice it; I think we can sometimes major in the minor doctrines & minor in the major doctrines. We have to always seek humility, because believers can become self-righteous about the particular issue. (Other examples could be baptism or a cappella singing.) Yet at the same time, there are Christians who obey the head covering teaching & neglect, dismiss, disobey the great commission. Jesus clearly taught we have to give up our earthly lives for him & the gospel. (Mark 8:34-38) Meaning Jesus is Lord & we should be working; proclaiming the gospel; seeking & saving the lost, making disciples of Jesus. Christians have to obey All the commands Jesus gave to his apostles. (Matthew 28:18-20) Teach them to obey everything I have commanded you.

[@IgnatiusEmanuel]

Thank you for your thoughts. Any disobedience to the King is a major, not a minor. Jesus and His apostle's teachings, especially those that are commanded, are all but minor. There are holidays and foods that Liberty has been given, but where liberty has not been given, I think it can be a major problem or a minor problem that leads to many majors. Baptism is a part of the commands in the great commission and would definitely not be a minor. Where Jesus and the apostles talk about acapella singing is a mystery to me. Baptism, on the other hand, the apostles connect it to the death and resurrection of both Jesus and his followers and to forgiveness of sins and being clothed in Jesus. I would have to think that would not be ranked with Acapella singing.

[@GaryDisciple]

I'm sorry if I offended you in what I said. I'm not criticizing you. I love this channel & agree with most everything you teach. This channel is Amazing! I Love the content! I'm not from an Anabaptist background. We all come from different places & everyone is at a different point in understanding of the scriptures. Because I come from a different Christian background, you don't understand everything I said. If we were face-to-face it would be easier to communicate. I gave you to many side comments, which distracted you from what I was trying to say. My point was spoken by Jesus. Jesus in Matthew 23:23,24 said the same thing better than me. "Woe to you, teachers of the Law & Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices--- mint, dill, and cummin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the Law--- justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former. You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel." I'm not saying this applies to you specifically. But many groups focus a lot on a certain particular doctrine. I'm just trying to say, let's apply our deepest conviction to the 'more important matters of the law.' In my opinion, the great commission is our greatest duty. 'Come, follow me,' Jesus said, 'and I will make you fishers of men.'

[@timstanford995]

@@IgnatiusEmanuel Amen!

[@user-kp9lg1cs7c]

I do not think your wife goes to hell for not wearing a head covering, but it is still something Yahweh wants

[@clintonjameshuddleston-apo9385]

@@IgnatiusEmanuel Absolutely

[@NITSUD-yr6rg]

I've been praying and I think I am going to start covering for worship on the Lord's day. I have a lot of fear and things holding me back. Thinking that maybe I'm wrong about the head covering and I also get so wrapped up in it it's all I focus on I can't even think about the Lord it seems to take up all my head space. Struggling a bit. On my husband's account *

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@NITSUD 1111 That can be very difficult! Blessings to you as you seek to obey Scripture. -Lynn

[@GodsWordisTruth-zg1jj]

Just keep reading the Bible no need to worry about it as it is not vital for salvation.

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@GodsWordisTruth-zg1jj Just because God may save some of those who have disobeyed him doesn't mean that we should encourage disobedience to God. -Lynn

[@JohnYoder-vi1gj]

1st Cor 11:15 👩

[@90aew]

I personally wear a veil, but I know several Godly ladies who I have the upmost confidence in, they don’t wear a head covering besides their natural uncut grown hair. They are convinced that is what the Bible teaches. I’m glad that Jesus knows our hearts and He still hears and answers our prayers even if a women doesn’t cover.

[@defendingthegospel721]

One can freely wear a veil if they want to but there is no obligation or commandment for any woman to wear a veil. When is says But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered they mean not covered in long hair or when it says For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn...again they mean not covered in long hair. What does not covered in long hair mean? Basically short hair. The opposite is true as well when it says Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head...they mean his head covered in long hair which is the same theme in verse 14. The problem for most is the word "cover." Please keep in mind that long hair covers a head so it fits the logic.

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@90aew @Defending the Gospel Unfortunately, viewing the head covering as the hair doesn't fit the Greek of the passage. A different word is used when it refers to the hair being a covering. -Lynn

[@frogleg10]

Doesn't their attitude also reflect a bit of self pride and a lack of humility before God?

[@charlayib]

So what’s the point of hair if it’s covered all the time???? Seriously 😒 Like I get covering for prayer but all the time still doesn’t make sense to me.

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@chaye We practice the head covering when praying or prophesying. Also in public, because we want to be ready to pray at any time. That doesn't mean that the hair is covered all the time, though it is covered most of the time. -Lynn

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@FA Before making such accusations, you might want to check into our actual beliefs and culture. Clearly, you aren't familiar with either of them. We're trying to live in accordance with Scripture and the faith historically believed by the followers of the apostles. If you have the same wish, you might consider listening to our messages with an open mind. -Lynn

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@FA There is a lot of variation among different Mennonite and Anabaptist churches. You're welcome to respond to the positions our ministry actually promotes. If you're more interested in responding to other groups instead, feel free to do that on their platforms. If you insist on respond to them here instead of responding to us, we'll need to block your comments. -Lynn

[@JesusMyLove14]

Wow what is happening here? what is with this threat of blocking comments? FA made several good point that no one here seems to want to prove wrong. Nice "Christian" responses here.

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@MLK Unfortunately, we don't have the time to respond to everyone. If you're looking for responses, I recommend this video (we wouldn't agree with everything in it, but it's very well thought out): kzbin.info/www/bejne/oZa7kqymbK-LnJY I would hardly think that you'd feel we would need to respond to FA's attacks on Christian groups that we're entirely unaffiliated with. Or that we would be glad to allow people to attack other Christians in the comments section on our channel. -Lynn

[@rtoguidver3651]

2 Corinthians 10:7 “Do ye look on things after the outward appearance? If any man trust to himself that he is Christ's, let him of himself think this again, that, as he is Christ's, even so are we Christ's.”

[@IgnatiusEmanuel]

Please explain.

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@R Toguidver We're not here to judge. We're just seeking to obey God, so that when we stand before him, we can be justified rather than condemned. We want the same for you. -Lynn

[@Monkey-low]

I'm here because I'm interested in veiling, but that nailpolished barista example seems oddly specific...

[@Repent.Believe.obeyJesus]

Awesome sis may the Lord give you boldness

[@Repent.Believe.obeyJesus]

@@FA-God-s-Words-Matter we will see on the great and terrible day of our Lord ...God bless you too

[@GailOwens]

How do you explain the concept of wearing a covering full time.

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@Gail Owens1972 We want our women to be ready to pray or prophesy any time. -Lynn

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@878 4436 Evidently she took off her head covering, or she didn't follow the Christian practice. -Lynn

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@878 4436 Maybe because Jesus, like us, believed that there are appropriate contexts in which a woman is free to remove her head covering. -Lynn

[@GailOwens]

@@SoundFaithChannel Many thanks

[@lukasderlokomotivfuhrer7657]

Why do those objections needs to be even answered? God's word isn't up to debate. Christian women are not to pray with uncovered heads. End of story.

[@defendingthegospel721]

I agree it isn't up for debate a woman should have their head covered but covered in long hair. The topic is LONG hair not a fabricated object. Simple end of story.

[@lukasderlokomotivfuhrer7657]

@@defendingthegospel721 End of story? The biblical covering is somethign that can be removed. Good luck trying to take off and back on your hair

[@defendingthegospel721]

@@lukasderlokomotivfuhrer7657 Clearly you have a problem reading the scriptures. According to those who believe women ought to wear veils this verse implies that a woman’s uncovered head is someone who does not wear a veil. That they are wrong for failing to wear it and assumes that such a person already has long hair. Therefore, the conclusion is that it must be referring to an “additional” covering. Another conclusion is that a woman ought to be covered ONLY when praying and prophesying then it would seem as though it is something that can be placed on or taken off like a veil. A typical question from those who are against “the covering” having more to do with hair is usually something like this: “If a woman ONLY needs to cover during prophecy or prayer, then how can a woman take off her hair and then put it back on?” The logical response to this is: Where did they read the word: "Only?” Also why assume that people are interpreting the word “covered” to mean hair and not LONG hair? (A topic for a later discussion.) I think this is probably one of the most misunderstood verses in my opinion because many of those who desperately preach on this topic assume that the Bible refers to “exclusive conditions” instead of viewing it as simply two examples being given. Evidence can be seen in verse 13 as it only mentions the word “praying.” So what happened to “prophesying?” Why is it missing? Well, because the idea of having a woman’s head covered was not meant to be understood as under two exclusive conditions, but were meant to be seen as examples. If there where really only two exclusive moments then one should have no problem if an “unveiled” woman speaks in tongues, interprets tongues, heals the sick, casts out devils, etc., right? Following such logic then it stands to reason that the other instances that I mentioned should be ok WITHOUT a veil, right? Now if those who claim exclusivity say NO, then they should admit that it is NOT under such conditions but that there may be more; thereby making the argument that the covering is removable based on two conditions, to be moot. Also, please keep in mind that the word “veil” is not actually mentioned here, neither anything that IMPLICITLY states that the covering is something can be placed on or taken off. People ASSUME this because they are misreading that verse. Also, as a side note I think it is interesting to note that being uncovered DOES NOT prevent a woman from prophesying, clearly a supernatural event. So what can we say about this? Just that Paul was giving us a couple of examples of how doing something HOLY or GODLY does not look right if she is uncovered, in other words not covered in long hair. Its as SIMPLE as that.

[@lukasderlokomotivfuhrer7657]

@@defendingthegospel721 "Another conclusion is that a woman ought to be covered ONLY when praying and prophesying then it would seem as though it is something that can be placed on or taken off like a veil." Very correct. Thank you for confirming my point

[@lukasderlokomotivfuhrer7657]

@@defendingthegospel721 Does a woman not have long hair by nature?

[@vanessaloy1049]

Do you agree that women can be prophets?

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@Vanessa Loy Yes, Scripture has some examples of prophetesses. -Lynn

[@spmoran4703]

I cover my head . It shows respect to God .

[@Wende-sj7fp]

Thank you this was very helpful

[@timothy6828]

Thank you so much Brother Daniel for this very insightful presentation!

[@RandomUninspiredDude]

So if women don’t wear head covering at all times, they aren’t saved, and if we don’t practice the holy kiss, and all the other tens of commands, and men wearing a hat or hood to protect ourselves from weather, we’re sinning?

[@robertmiller812]

Clearly a works for salvation argument. I agree with you this shows that people have become legalistic and have allowed man's interpretation to supersede Bible truths.

[@charlayib]

Also when the Lord clothes Adam and Eve they were given tunics but nothing about a veil. Why

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@chaye We don't know whether God gave Eve a veil or not. This was a Christian teaching that all the apostolic churches practiced, however. @FA We've interpreted 1 Cor 11 as Christians have throughout history up until about a hundred years ago. -Lynn

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@FA If you're interested in engaging respectfully with the position that we actually hold, we welcome your thoughts and even disagreement. If not, we'll need to block your comments. -Lynn

[@JesusMyLove14]

Good question. It would seem that it was not necessary. The arguments about wearing a veil (for Christians) is something that happened after the Bible was written when people started making up a whole host of denominations the doctrines of which have past on for years.

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@MLK Are you not familiar with 1 Cor 11? Wearing a veil is taught by Paul himself. -Lynn

[@JesusMyLove14]

There's nothing disrespectful in F a's response. You might need to watch out for spiritual pride. I am familiar with 1st Corinthians 11. Since you didn't understand 1st Corinthians at 11:15. Nowhere it mentions the word veil except for to explain that the hair was giving instead of a veil. It seems that you care a lot about "respecting" what people believe instead of what God says. Are we supposed to take a shower with a veil? Are we forbidden to pray while taking a shower? Obviously not. Only legalism would make you think that way. May God liberate you with the Holy Ghost.

[@reflectionsinthebible3579]

Also notice it is talking about women not girls.

[@patrickhamilton7849]

Semantics.

[@reflectionsinthebible3579]

Oh also, it seems it was the married women who covered, but then maybe the young girls also covered in meetings. If you read where Joseph met his wife/that’s when she began to cover.

[@jedfgross]

Excellent message brother. But on the point of hair being the glory of the women and therefore its her covering instead of an actual vailing. I would say yes it is her her glory covering given her by God, but because she is under her husband her glory(her hair) must be covered so that her glory does not impose on the glory of man, who is to be her glory!

[@debrawehrly6900]

sounds kind of arrogant

[@godswarriors7543]

Some women like to wear a headband, cap, hat or even a hair tie that contains the Ten Commandments in order to obey Deut. 6:8-9. Because it says it is for the children and not just men or women. It normally doesn't cover all the hair as Paul describes. Those coverings have come to be known as the armour of God. There are eight pieces that many are seaching for. There is the head, both hands, the belt, breastplate, heart and feet. Exactly what are they, what do they contain? Jesus tells us that if we love Him to keep His words for they are spirit and they are life, Maybe that is the spirit we are to walk in. We just need more work and workers. God grafted Christians into Israel so the O.T. wasn't just given to the Jews but Christian as well. Those commands God gives to His children is for all who believes in Jesus. The O.T. is our school master just as the Prophets and N.T.. ALL scripture is inspired. If the head of woman is the man, then why isn't the man's head covered?

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@godswarriors7543 You're right that God grafted us Christians into Israel, but he also made a large paradigm shift in doing so. Here's a video where we talk about the purpose of the Old Testament Law under Christ: kzbin.info/www/bejne/rIHad2eGhJaraLM -Lynn

[@godswarriors7543]

@@SoundFaithChannel And yet, we are told that God does not change.

[@bonkusgrl3733]

Great Preaching thank you your info will help me share with my sisters as to why! Also, i assume sleep counts as well? What about romantic times? Thank you for the insight!

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@Bonkusgrl Good questions. Here are my own opinions. Since one isn't likely to be praying while sleeping, and since one usually sleeps in private, it wouldn't be as big a deal to wear it while sleeping, but it still might be a good idea. Also, Paul writes that woman is the glory of man and that her hair is her glory, so I believe that romantic times are a time when it's appropriate not to wear one. However, you should definitely be careful to follow your conscience. God bless. -Lynn

[@bonkusgrl3733]

@@SoundFaithChannel Thank you for getting back to me on this it is very helpful! God Bless ! :)

[@betsabeasalomon4023]

when you`ll learn some greek i`ll listen to you till then I`ll listen to more erudite people

[@robertmiller812]

A reasonable request. I would add that one should set aside church bias also.

[@narrowway4626]

I have an important questions, I hope some omne can respond to. I am 54 years old and unmarried. Because I am unmarried and my father is not my head anymmore, I think of myself as directly in submission to Jesus Christ, therefore, do I need to wear a head covering or is it only for women or girls under the authority of their husbands or fathers?

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@narrowway4626 Thank you for the question. It doesn't seem that Paul makes a distinction of this kind in 1 Cor 11. It appears the veil is for all women, even though Paul uses the headship order to demonstrate its importance. Hope this is helpful. -Lynn

[@thegreergal]

At what ages do you cover your daughters? From birth? 1 Corinthians 11 is speaking to husbands and wives only? Thank you for this. I have been wearing a head covering but only at church. I would like to understand more and this series is helping so much! Praise the Lord.

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@thegreergirl There's some variation in practice here. In our church, many girls wait until they are ready to become Christians to start covering. However, some start younger. Some Anabaptist churches veil their daughters when they're maybe eight or so. There don't seem to be any indications in 1 Cor 11 that it is speaking only of husbands and wives. There seem to have been people in the early church practicing both ways, but the writers who talked about it seemed to all be on the side of veiling before marriage as well. I hope this helps. -Lynn

[@thegreergal]

@@SoundFaithChannel thanks brother

[@prophit267]

awesome video! was listening to this in bed at night with the lights off and a fan on. heard that baby crying in the background of the vid but it sounded like it was coming from my room and nearly gave me a heart attack lol

[@simcraddock8755]

Great words. Verses for consideration. Gen ch 3 v 21 - coats, Gen ch 6 v 14 - pitch, look into the coverings of the tabernacle, crossing of the Red Sea. All about a natural and spiritual covering. Then look at Numbers ch 5 v 18. Now to the New Testament. Matt ch 27 v 51 - veil to God is no longer required. We now have access through Christ. 1 Cor ch 11 v 4-16 - covering - Greek word Kata = covering down (from head) 1 Tim ch 2 v 9 - apparel - covering - Katastole = down from head to the wrists and ankles Rev ch 21 v 2 - down - katabainousan = down from head to toe (complete covering of the bride of Christ by God) Bride = veil. It’s all wrapped up in the atonement, the backbone and centre of the Bible. Sisters with their heads covered represent the bride of Christ approaching Christ in humility and we as Brethren or a representative of Christ need to look at them as our example of how we should approach Christ. Because one day (we pray) Christ will present both Brothers and Sisters (the bride of Christ) to God and God will cover us all and we will be one with God.

[@deepjoydeb4330]

Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonour to him? How long is long hair? Did Jesus had long hair? What abt Samson? If yes, why was it not a dishonor? Didn't they go against the nature? When the Jewish men cover their head during prayer, is it also a dishonour? Can't women talk to God while bathing?

[@defendingthegospel721]

Good point one should then reevaluate whether one is reading the scriptures correctly

[@loricalass4068]

When I was a young adult in the early 60s, I had rejected religion, and the Bible. But sometimes I would drop into a local Roman Catholic Cathedral. Just because of its grandeur and beauty inside. I would cover my head there. But then I was told that both protestants and Catholics no longer required for women’s heads to be covered before entering a church. It was a strange thing to me that when I heard that the rules had been changed, I felt this conviction, strongly, that the change was wrong. That was very odd since I really didn’t care one way or another. Years later I did finally come to the Lord, eventually to Hebrew Roots. Though I never met anyone personally, who ever even thought about head coverings, anywhere, including with Hebrew Roots, online I did see that some HR women were promoting head coverings. This was an excellent analysis of the topic and helpful to my understanding. Most important to me, though, is that I know I need to follow that conviction given to me by the Almighty, even if it took me decades to catch on.

[@marie4585]

iF someone were saved ( and always saved) it would seem to me that if they were TRULY a Christian, they would WANT TO obey God and please Him. No say that because they are aved ( and always saved) that they can continue to be as unholy as they wish.

[@russellwilson8931]

Paul definitely said there was no debate about headcovering in the churches, nor did he say that it was his idea, but that it was commanded in all the churches. Paul also said that all scripture was inspired by God, 2Ti 3:16 KJV All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works, And again Paul wrote that we all will appear before the judgment seat of Christ to give account. 2Co 5:10 KJV For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad. And lastly, Jesus told us how we will be judged, saying. Joh 12:48 KJV He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. With this in mind, I would rather err by obeying the Bible than to be found disobeying the Word.

[@reflectionsinthebible3579]

We are to represent the bride of Christ ultimately. That’s what it really comes down to. And the men are to represent the groom. Ultimately that’s what it’s really all about.

[@doriesse824]

Is there any place where Jesus talks about women wearing a headcovering? I can only find it in Paul's writings. Why did Jesus leave it out if it's important?

[@jennifereverett6298]

I think of 'for the angels' as being a sign to God's holy angels.

[@jacquiedeseive3068]

I believe it's 3 fold. A setting apart to indicate we are our Father's to the Father's army of angels to observe us in obedience to Him, to be a symbol of position and authority we have to the fallen angels, and a covering of humility to honor our brothers from the temptation of the lust the enemy would entice them with, as well as covetousness by other women if we have been blessed with hair appealing to other women who may be displeased with their own. I only add the latter statement because I have been blessed with long healthy thick gray hair. Before I was prompted to study and obey the teaching of head covering, I was chronically being complemented by other women in the church I attended about my hair. It got uncomfortable and embarrassing to have that attention put upon me when all our attention should be upon our Father and KIng. I cover because my Father will not share His glory with another. Rather, I consider my head covering my gift much like a crown from my Father given in His order and authority for me, knowing I am covered by Him and in all the ways that implies through the Scriptures.

[@michaelpond8529]

In 1st cor. 11 it also says because of the angels...did we have angels then?...do we have angels now?...yes we did have angels and do have angels now....Paul says because of the angels not absolute as to why but it does tell me that women's head covering is not cultural and still for today

[@meghanmckenzie2516]

Not sure where I stand on this as a woman and representstive of God but I'm curious. I do want to do what is right I wonder if this tradition does have something to do with the nephalim as there is nothing mentioned in Genesis about a woman being born with head covering or that being part of the curse specifically.

[@Travis_Marshall]

FAVORITE POINTS 23:49 "if it be a shame" 29:09 When 30:48 "because of the angels"

[@lrajic8281]

I was raised “ a women must cover her head at church and when praying” tradition. I read etiquette and beauty books, now out of print and definitely was at the time (printed in the 60s and I read it in the 70s). One book said wear a headband or fold a scarf into a triangle or rectangle, and for a woman to wear it symbolizes a hat. To wear one indicates you are tidy and respectful. Wear the scarf to tell everyone you care about your hair and accessories. Wear one always to make sure any gust of wind or perspiration will not mess your hair. This advice was strange and archaic, and it was fussy. But she was right! Even now, when I watch vintage movies and see very old photos , my perception is the woman doing do, she really cares about her style and doesn’t want to have her hair in her face as she eats or rides in a car, etc. And nobody says “why are you wearing a scarf” or “why are wearing a headband?” I always wear a hair clip or a plastic or metal headband, because the message is I care about my hair even though it gets windblown. Nobody ever asked me, but it is my message. Whether I dm under the protection or direction of a man is ridiculous. Nowadays, most men don’t have anything to offer in the area or protection, or even morals.

[@David-ul4l]

cf. on you tube: "Head Covering Debate: The Greater Glory Revealed: Part 1"

[@Nobadvybes]

Most did not ask to be put in the mixed category however the make up you are born who you are the Lords child no matter your ancestry ❤️

[@SundancerrMusic]

Brother, if you would like to learn Greek I would recommend the Beginning with New Testament Greek grammar and you can find lectures for it online for free. Knowing the words and the tense forms you are highlighting would be very beneficial for your exegesis and your people. God bless!

[@peter_waldo3715]

H"And she put her widow's garments off from her, and covered her with a veil, and wrapped herself, and sat in an open place, which is by the way to Timnath; for she saw that Shelah was grown, and she was not given unto him to wife. When Judah saw her, he thought her to be an harlot; because she had covered her face." (GENESIS 38:14&15) "And she arose, and went away, and laid by her vail from her, and put on the garments of her widowhood." GEN38:19) HERE IT SEEMS THAT PROSTITUTES DID INDEED WEAR A VAIL. ADAM CLARK GOT THE IDEA THAT PROSTITUTES DID NOT WEAR HEAD COVERINGS?

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@peter_waldo3715 This is talking about a very different culture, from thousands of years before Paul wrote 1 Corinthians. Also, it appears the point for Tamar was to cover her face, not just her hair, so this looks like a different application. Does that make sense? -Lynn

[@courtneytherien3213]

The only objection I've never seen answered, and I'd LOVE to see it addressed, is a subset of the "cultural" argument. Not related to the prostitution, or Greek culture of the time, or Corinthian culture of the time, with respect to head covering, but related to the change in cultural perspectives on women with short hair. Paul says (paraphrasing) "IF it's shameful for a woman to shave her head, then she should wear a covering". Well back then it was shameful for a woman to have short hair, but today it's not. It's trendy, popular, chic, etc. Now... perhaps we should question (and not support) the reasons why it has become a non-issue for women to wear their hair short, but that doesn't itself fully address the challenge. One could say to Paul - well, it's not shameful for a woman to shave her head, so I guess she doesn't need to cover her head. Or indeed, they might say fine, Paul, I don't feel like covering my head, so I guess I'll just go ahead and cut off my hair. No biggie. I think the answer to this challenge lies in the fact that the short hair/shame = need to cover argument is used by Paul as an illustration to support his argument, but it's not the primary reason why one should cover their hair. I think the primary reason is given up front, with the order of creation, although why this order of creation necessitates covering is still somewhat unclear to me... but I think it becomes more clear when we focus on the fact that short hair = shame is used as an illustration to show us how a woman should feel with her head uncovered. Cutting off hair is like making a woman a man; it's brazen, a denial and rejection of nature and an attempted usurpation of another role. So it seems that Paul is trying to tell women that going around with their head uncovered is equally brazen, or similarly a rejection of nature - it's a bid for false "freedom". Those are just the few thoughts I've had, but I'd love to see this angle discussed more, by smarter people than me who have studied this more in depth. Because I think this is the only potentially valid "cultural" argument I've heard, but I never hear this talked about in discussions that support head covering today.

[@courtneytherien3213]

@@FA-God-s-Words-Matter Thanks, I appreciate your detailed response. I agree with you that long hair is a covering (indeed, Paul says so in this passage) but I also think Paul is talking about two types of covering. The long hair is a woman's glory, given to her by God for a covering, but this glory is to be covered by the woman with some sort of cloth while praying and prophesying. Despite this slight difference in opinion of interpretation, your comments have given me good food for reflection. If I understand correctly, one of your points is that Paul is instructing that nature (which would be God, as the creator of the order of nature) tells us that women should wear their hair long - which means that the cultural shift in opinions about short hair for women is itself wrong. In other words, IF you were to agree with my interpretation on two types of coverings, Paul is saying it is shameful for a woman not to wear a head covering, AND it is shameful for her to cut off her hair (regardless of culture). I think your question about why a fabric veil just "looks right" when we picture a woman praying is a really interesting one. I'm sure some people would respond that we've been conditioned to that by historical images of veiled women. But I don't think that's right - I think you're onto something - there's something inherently "natural" about a woman wearing a veil while praying, just as there's something inherently "natural" about a woman having long hair.

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@Courtney Therien Very good thoughts, Courtney. I would agree with you that, because Paul used multiple reasons that weren't cultural, the culture argument doesn't work. Another problem is that Paul considers this a "tradition." If you look at the usage of that word in the NT, it indicates teachings, in this case apostolic teachings. Since the apostles were teaching it, and every church practiced it, it couldn't be a cultural thing. I'll make a note of your comment, because sometime I want to cover this topic, and it's a very good question. -Lynn

[@courtneytherien3213]

@@SoundFaithChannel Thanks Lynn - I appreciate your response, and for your stepping in to mediate with the other commenter. One thing I didn't mention in my original post, because it's entirely personal experience (not rooted specifically in Scripture), is that I've struggled off and on for years with feeling convicted about head covering, and I've noticed that the times I feel the conviction (after a period of ignoring it) is often shortly after I've cut my hair quite short. This is one of the reasons I raised this particular "cultural" question - women today think it's fine to cut their hair short, and/so they also think there's no need to cover their head. Yet it seems as though God uses my "shorn" head to bring my attention back to this church tradition. If you do discuss this in another talk, I definitely look forward to hearing it!

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@Courtney Therien Thanks for sharing your experience! I've heard multiple women express that same sense. They feel like head covering is the right thing to do, even though they've always been taught otherwise. God bless you as you seek to follow the New Testament faith. -Lynn

[@dellRussell-dl1qt]

@@SoundFaithChannel in the KJV it says it's an ordinance. Because the KJV writters understood that in the context of Paul's giving this they use ordinance. It's something that was to be done by all churches for all times.

[@PrettySunShines]

Would you say Jesus had short hair?

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@PrettySunShines Probably so. -Lynn

[@aikozoe6598]

1 cor 11;16 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God. it was the tradition and custon and culture of those times. nothing else in 1 pet 3 we read about women coming to the church meetings with plaited hair so women did not cover the hair. thirdly, the Bible says that everything has to be gounded on at least TWO witnesses. there is only ONE place in the Bible where you read about the head covering and that is also not very clear since we read in the very passage that the hair of women is their covering. in the new testament we dont follow the traditions of old. we follow Lord Yeshu who set us free from the external things. now the reality is Christ Himself. not the things on the outside those who wear head coverings rely on the Flesh which is SIN and that is the WRONG REBELLION... thats bondage to sin...

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@aikozoe6598 Paul says that they don't have a custom of contending with this truth. But the head covering itself is a "tradition" (v2). As we see in 2 Thes 2:15, a Christian tradition was not simply a culture of the day, but was something handed down from the apostles for all Christians to follow. It is easy to have braided hair showing out from under a covering; people do it all the time. Those who wear head coverings are following the commands of those who learned at Jesus's feet and whom he authorized to publish his word to the whole world. -Lynn

[@MosesGrace-f8e]

Instead of arguing about these extra-Biblical commandments like headcoverings, why don't you worry more about keeping commandments actually found in Torah like Tzitziot? Too Jewish for you, perhaps?

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@MosesGrace-f8e Are you a Christian? If so, I would hope that you'd accept the New Testament as part of Scripture. -Lynn

[@MosesGrace-f8e]

@@SoundFaithChannel Christian (apostacy from Mosheh), no, but yes I accept Yeshua as Mashiach and Shaul's writings as the Apostolic Testimony of the validity of the Tanakh's covenantal promises. But you need to understand Torah like Shaul did to be able to understand his instructions in 1Cor11. He is most definitely not commanding women to veil their heads with a fabric covering. He is gleaning a spiritual understanding of Biblical headship 'because of the angels', namely Bereshit 1 & 2. I would challenge you to show me a commandment from YHVH, including His mouthpiece Mosheh, for a woman to wear a head covering You do understand that no one has added to the Law of Mosheh, correct? Not even Mashiach Himself, although having authority to being the Lawgiver Himself. But absolutely none of the prophets or apostles would have ever considered adding regulations or stipulations to the Law of Moses; it is among the most grievous of Sins.

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@MosesGrace-f8e What you're suggesting is not historic Christianity. The Law of Moses is no longer binding on Christians, as the apostles unanimously taught. I recommend this video, which covers the issue: kzbin.info/www/bejne/rIHad2eGhJaraLM And no one up until recently has held that Paul didn't mean for women to wear a cloth covering. Those who came directly after the apostles practiced this apostolic teaching and taught it as part of Christianity. That's a new idea. -Lynn

[@MosesGrace-f8e]

@@SoundFaithChannel The Mosaic Covenantal agreement is no longer binding on followers of Yeshua. But the conditions of that covenant, the Laws orated by Mosheh, were instituted into the New Covenant and the helper was promised to us to cause us to walk in obedience to all the Choqim and Mishpatim (Statutes and Ordinances) of YHVH. I'd advise you to go reread it: Yirmeyahu 31 and Yehezqel 36. The apostles never teach anywhere that the Law of Mosheh no longer apply to the Faithful; you have mistaken their teachings against Pharisaic Oral Tradition and Religions devised by men for the Law of Mosheh, a very common miscalculation for you and your ilk. Rather, the apostles called themselves followers of "the Way", the Way being the Torah of Mosheh. And honestly, I could care less for the understandings and teachings of gentile usurpers of the True Faith and their erroneous interpretations and man-made traditions they hold in esteem over YHVH's Commandments. Their lack of discernment only shows off the fact that the Ruach was nowhere to be found amongst them. These teachings of Paul concerning Hair Length and Pesach Requirements in 1Cor 11 should be able to be discerned by children in the Word, much less by Ministers!

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@MosesGrace-f8e Thanks for your perspective. The video I linked responds to that viewpoint, showing that the New Testament clearly teaches that we no longer need to obey the Law of Moses. -Lynn

[@meghanmckenzie2516]

I don't thinknit makes sense that God built women beautiful but then expected them to be covered even though they were born naked. This has to be linked to the curse in the garden of eden if it's true

[@joedingy9854]

then why should they wear clothes at all if you follow that logic

[@larainehruby1376]

Only 2 minutes into this exciting topic about tradition and history and Bible verses to illuminate. However, not accurate that head coverings (such as veils and sometimes hats to substitute for veils) are completely absent from the meetings of Christians to worship. A few women still wear veils in Roman Catholic Church, and it is a sign of following tradition, but I’m too shy to ask why they do this.

[@veritas399]

It has been the traditional interpretation of the Roman Catholic church for men to be bareheaded, and the women to be covered. From 1917 [Roman Catholic] code of canon law, Canon 1262 "Men, in a church or outside a church, while they are assisting at sacred rites, shall be bare-headed, unless the approved mores of the people or peculiar circumstances determine otherwise; women, however, shall have a covered head and be modestly dressed, especially when they approach the table of the Lord."

[@user-kp9lg1cs7c]

@@veritas399 The RCC is strongly heretical but they are right on the head covering.

[@ohthankg-dforthebourgeoisi9800]

Women in the Eastern Orthodox Christian churches wear veils or headscarves. The Amish and Mennonites wear bonnets. The Episcopalians wear hats or did til the 1970’s or so. Traditional Black church ladies wear hats they refer to as “crowns” and are quite elaborate! Ladies in the Catholic tradition wear what are referred to as chapel veils. Outside church they would wear the hat style of the day. So they differentiated between the church head covering, the chapel veil, and the daily head cover, which was a stylish hat.

[@theparttimehomemaker]

The celestial Church of christ also were head covering x

[@marriage4life893]

@@veritas399 Thank you for the information. Did the RCC change their canon law in the 80's regarding the matter?

[@reflectionsinthebible3579]

We don’t need to do the foot washing. That was because they walked in sandals and dirt for one. For two, it was symbolic of serving one another. It is serving one another that is commanded.

[@mwendwa_m]

Is there a reason why the women don't cover the front part of their hair? Im furious to know, please. Some cpver only half the head.nwhy dont they cover the entire head from the hairline? Thanks

[@izabelak2800]

I like to cover my hairline. But here's some thoughts: -It's really hard for it not to slip. -If one shaves her head, an inch or so would be permissible to be seen by men. Why not show an inch anyways? -Some ladies prefer it for style! Those are a few ideas since you are interested in knowing.

[@SeanRhoadesChristopher]

Where the women expected to go shave their own heads? I would assume a rebellious woman would have to be placed in a pillory then shorn.

[@SoundFaithChannel]

1 Corinthians 11 discusses head coverings and mentions that if a woman does not cover her head, it is the same as if her head were shaved, implying that it would be a shame for her to be shorn or shaven. The passage uses this imagery to emphasize the importance of the practice of head covering. At least in what I’ve read of the early Christians I have not seen any practice of anyone shaving their own head or of others forcibly shaving women’s heads because of this Bible verse. Although I have seen in the early Christian writings, the Head Covering being practiced everywhere.

[@SeanRhoadesChristopher]

⁠women where included in the Nazirite Vow, and they would willingly shave all the hair off if the vow was broken by contact with a dead human body, or if the vow was fulfilled, see Num 6. There was also the captive wife of Deu 21.10-14, in this case my guess is in most cases a forced shorn. Can we connect this with willful humility and unwilling humiliation?

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@SeanRhoadesChristopher Jesus teaches that Christians shouldn't use violence or coercion. So Paul's statement is not a command to punish women who don't follow this teaching by shaving their heads. That would be against Jesus' and Paul's teachings. It's simply an illustration to show why the head covering is important. -Lynn

[@SeanRhoadesChristopher]

@@SoundFaithChannel you have a serious problem if sometimes force isn’t used. Remember Eli’s weak attempt to discipline his sons and the result⚠️ Paul teaches us to deny the lazy food, Peter killed a husband and wife team who lied about their finances, Jesus disciplines the Churches in Revelation. There are many examples of Christian forms of coercion, and I do not see a problem with a private pillory shorn of a oppositional wife, especially in this age. “The blueness of a wound cleanseth away evil: so do stripes the inward parts of the belly.” (Proverbs 20:30, KJV) “As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.” (Revelation 3:19, KJV) “A servant will not be corrected by words: for though he understand he will not answer.” (Proverbs 29:19, KJV)

[@SeanRhoadesChristopher]

you have a serious problem if sometimes force isn’t used. Remember Eli’s weak attempt to discipline his sons and the result⚠️ Paul teaches us to deny the lazy food, Peter killed a husband and wife team who lied about their finances, Jesus disciplines the Churches in Revelation. There are many examples of Christian forms of coercion, and I do not see a problem with a private pillory shorn of a oppositional wife, especially in this age. “The blueness of a wound cleanseth away evil: so do stripes the inward parts of the belly.” (Proverbs 20:30, KJV) “A servant will not be corrected by words: for though he understand he will not answer.” (Proverbs 29:19, KJV) “As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.” (Revelation 3:19, KJV) “Faithful are the wounds of a friend; but the kisses of an enemy are deceitful.” (Proverbs 27:6, KJV)

[@maggiechildofgod974]

What church do you belong to?

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@maggiechildofgod974 We belong to an Anabaptist church. -Lynn

[@maggiechildofgod974]

@SoundFaithChannel I wish there was one here but we really appreciate you and what you are doing. It is very helpful.

[@kiyomima-ro3209]

i've been researching this topic for maybe 2 months now. i read 1 Cor 11 and just read over the headcoverings because i was taught that it wasn't necessary anymore due to culture differences. However the Lord convicted me about modesty several months ago and i've since changed my entire wordrobe to glorify Him over my body. Headcovering seemed to be the next thing He was asking me to do. The excuse of culture suddenly, at the Holy Spirit's guidance, didn't make any sense to me because the Word of the Lord surpasses the changing of culture. Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever! ❤ i have only recently begun headcovering, just under a week. i went to evening service a couple days ago and was nervous about it. i'm going to church tomorrow, as it is Sunday, and am nervous about it. People will start to notice and i am so concerned that i will lose friends over it, and possibly be told by an elder, "we don't do this here." Now of course, the latter situation is unlikely because my church isn't that type of church. i'm fully aware it's my flesh and the enemy spinning worse case scenario stories 😅 Nevertheless, i am worried i'll be mocked as being some religion, or be told i'm putting myself under the law in a legalistic manner, or something or other. i have never seen any woman cover their head at my church so i have nooo idea how this will go down. Anyway, thank you SO incredibly much! These videos were answers to my prayers! i asked the Lord for wisdom and guidance on how to answer when the time comes that i'm asked! Even if i lose friends or find hardship in this, i desperately want to honour the Lord, draw nearer to Him, and i know He has asked this of me. Who am i to say no to my Saviour? 🥰❤️🙌🙏

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@kiyomima-ro3209 I hope Sunday went well for you! -Lynn

[@kiyomima-ro3209]

@@SoundFaithChannel It did! Thank you! My own nerves got the better of me, i feared the worst 😅 But the Lord is so sweet and generous to help me and shine on me as i obey Him. On the way i prayed, asking the Lord to help me. Then at church, a woman told me she liked my covering and that i looked beautiful in it! 🥹🙌 i am in awe of how gracious Jesus is!!! i was so afraid, but it was so smooth 🤭🙌

[@rachellesawyer6523]

what is a holy kiss?

[@matty206]

An affectionate greeting.

[@roan9773]

You don’t go to the beach?

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@Roan We do. But we wear the same clothes as we typically do in public. -Lynn

[@lukasderlokomotivfuhrer7657]

@@SoundFaithChannel I do not go to the beach either. i always prefered the mountains

[@heartsforchristhomeschool9057]

I so much have the desire to start head covering. But my husband isn't willing to let me completely surrender my to the Lord.

[@TheOneandonlyme2011]

I will preface this statement first with saying that being submissive to your husband is to give glory to God. Personally, I would seek a scriptural basis that would allow or disallow your husband to determine if you follow the convictions you have from the Lord. I don’t believe it is wise to disregard scriptural teachings in light of being submissive to your head. Thus, I say to seek guidance from scripture and the counsel of Godly teachers to inform your decision in moving forward. May God give you wisdom on your journey 🙏

[@someoneveryclever]

Thanks for this powerful video Bro. Daniel! Would you be able to let me know the year the first commentary that came out that falsely claimed that the "long hair" was the sole covering spoken of in 1 Corinthians 11? This would be helpful information to debunk that false position.

[@TheJarmans07]

I'd like to know also

[@someoneveryclever]

@@TheJarmans07 I found it. It was published in 1965 by Abel Isaakson.

[@Nobadvybes]

I love your message no disrespect

[@denissaarsova5996]

Very thankful for this sound biblical teaching. The Lord started convicting me to start head covering the last week, so I'm trying to understand 1 Corinthians 11 as best as possible. Studying it verse by verse in greek and many translations, also tracking the early church handing down, the apostle's disciples and early church leaders... It's so clear. I started covering at home the past two days and wow, what a difference. One thing, one last thing I don't quite understand 100% is if this teaching applies to "all women" or just married ones. In my understanding (not saying that I'm right) Paul is talking about God's order, which includes marriage, but I think it applies to all humans (men or women). In greek the word for 'woman' is the same as 'wife'. But logically it seems to me to be the Godly order. Am I wrong? Tertullian has commented a lot on the head covering and as mentioned in the video, the early church practiced head covering even for the virgins. The passage is crystal clear for the wives, but what about unmarried ladies, which is my case? I'd love your feedback!

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@denissaarsova5996 Good question! Tertullian makes some great arguments about this in On the Veiling of Virgins. If I recall, he points out that the reasons Paul gives for veiling apply equally well to unmarried women as well as to married women. -Lynn

[@GaryDisciple]

Did the early writings outside of the NT, teach/show the church practiced literal feet washings? I imagine they did. Personally, I've participated in this a few times, but it has never been something I or the group I'm part of, does on a regular basis. To me feet washing was an important practice in ancient times. I'm sure, with opportunities readily available. But that's not the way it is in 2020. So the way I mostly apply this teaching, is being a servant to my brothers & sisters. (John 13:1, 34 & 35) Loving other disciples of Jesus, the way Jesus loved his disciples; showing/demonstrating the full extent of our love for each other. (Gal 6:10, Heb 6:10 & Mt 25:40)

[@reflectionsinthebible3579]

That wasn’t literal except for the time as they wore sandals and would have very dirty feet. It is symbolic meaning we should serve one another.

[@squishymonster3267]

Hello, Since the headcovering commandment extends to both women and men (men having to remain uncovered), i have to conclude that the commandment was meant only for church assemblies...it seems this way because i cant imagine that Paul would be saying that men can never wear a hat to protect their head from the sun or from the cold.

[@BasicBiblicalTruth]

Yes, the context is clearly speaking about assembly meetings.

[@robertmiller812]

@@BasicBiblicalTruth which part within verses 1-16?

[@BasicBiblicalTruth]

@@robertmiller812 Hi, Robert. First Corinthians 11 falls in the middle of a long discourse on worship. Paul began by addressing how Christians were to relate to pagan worship in chapter 8 before moving to the assembly gathering of Christians in chapter 11, which extends to chapter 14. Also, in vv. 4-5, “praying and prophesying” is employed by Paul as a merism by which he intends to include all religious activities of the Christian church. As Gordon Fee says, “The two verbs are neither exhaustive nor exclusive but representative: they point to the two foci of Christian worship-God and the gathered believers-speech that is either Godward or humanward.”[1] Paul is not prohibiting men from wearing head coverings at all times. You can wear a ball cap to keep the sun off, or a toque to keep you warm in the winter, or a hard hat if you work at a construction site. Paul is not prohibiting men from wearing head coverings outside church gatherings, just as he isn't telling women they must wear a head covering at all times. This mandate is for church meetings because the uncovered head of men and the covered head of woman is symbolic-silently proclaiming truth in the same way the Lord's supper is symbolic. [1] Fee, Gordon D. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. Revised. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2014), ePub, 11:2-16..

[@BasicBiblicalTruth]

Robert, I don't think my response showed up in the notifications. If not, you'll have to go to the video itself. Regards, Kevin

[@haileylindberg4365]

I loved this! Thank you for coving this issue. Great work! I do have a genuine question....So, if a Christian couple decides to wear wedding rings because they have prayed and talked and think this is a wise thing in our culture to show marital commitment. Because they are in covenant as Christians. Would you rebuke them?

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@Hailey Lindberg Great question. So far as I know, we don't believe wedding rings to be wrong. We encourage Christians not to dress in order to show social status and not to ornament ourselves with expensive things. We choose not to wear wedding rings for this reason, but we wouldn't judge those who do, because that's not necessarily the only reason people would wear them. Does that make sense? -Lynn

[@haileylindberg4365]

@@SoundFaithChannel Yes! This was helpful thank you so much. Thank you for the clarification. I agree wholeheartedly! ❤️

[@brihilton]

I am new to headcoverings and their application. Is it necessary for women to have their headcovered at all times? Examples I'm thinking of are the beach or maybe while sleeping. I know it says when praying but I pray alot if I wake up at night( we have two young children). Any thoughts would be gladly welcomed, thank you! May God bless!

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@blueberry Great question. We encourage our women to cover their heads as much as possible, so that they can pray anytime. Many women wear coverings that they can keep on at night, but others have a covering handy to put on if they were to wake up. We also don't change our dress styles significantly to go to the beach, so that question doesn't affect us. -Lynn

[@patrickhamilton7849]

@@SoundFaithChannel Amen!

[@SoundFaithChannel]

@878 4436 You are welcome to practice as you wish. However, we would like to practice according to what seems the most straightforward reading of Scripture, especially since that reading was considered correct by those who followed after the apostles. You should know that your interpretation is a modern one. Just to note a few things: - The OT priests were not under the New Testament. We now worship God "in spirit and in truth" rather than by the old law. - God doesn't condemn anyone for circumstances outside of their control. Jesus was forced to wear the crown of thorns. - There are circumstances when it is perfectly legitimate for a woman not to wear a head covering. That doesn't mean that they shouldn't wear it when praying or prophesying. - A head covering is no more an idol than clothing is. - 'If “covering” really meant a veil then one would have to explain why anyone would possibly come up with a judgment that a woman praying or prophesying WITHOUT A FABRIC VEIL ON THEIR HEAD WOULD LOGICALLY OR NATURALLY LOOK WRONG? Someone needs to explain this logically. Be honest, does looking at someone doing this naturally create a thought that a veil is missing?' - Most cultures through history would have felt that a woman not wearing a head covering was missing something. So do many women today who feel the need to cover their heads. It's only modern Western Christianity that has tried to change that. God bless, -Lynn

[@JesusMyLove14]

Just follow Gods words not a sect or someone's interpretation.