قالوا عن المرأة وياليتهم ما قالوا

آخـــر الـــمـــشـــاركــــات


مـواقـع شـقــيـقـة
شبكة الفرقان الإسلامية شبكة سبيل الإسلام شبكة كلمة سواء الدعوية منتديات حراس العقيدة
البشارة الإسلامية منتديات طريق الإيمان منتدى التوحيد مكتبة المهتدون
موقع الشيخ احمد ديدات تليفزيون الحقيقة شبكة برسوميات شبكة المسيح كلمة الله
غرفة الحوار الإسلامي المسيحي مكافح الشبهات شبكة الحقيقة الإسلامية موقع بشارة المسيح
شبكة البهائية فى الميزان شبكة الأحمدية فى الميزان مركز براهين شبكة ضد الإلحاد

يرجى عدم تناول موضوعات سياسية حتى لا تتعرض العضوية للحظر

 

       

         

 

    

 

 

    

 

قالوا عن المرأة وياليتهم ما قالوا

صفحة 12 من 14 الأولىالأولى ... 2 11 12 13 ... الأخيرةالأخيرة
النتائج 111 إلى 120 من 137

الموضوع: قالوا عن المرأة وياليتهم ما قالوا

  1. #111
    تاريخ التسجيل
    Sep 2006
    المشاركات
    1,550
    الدين
    الإسلام
    آخر نشاط
    22-03-2017
    على الساعة
    08:38 AM

    افتراضي


    Chapter III
    Part 1
    Woman's Veil in the Bible

    1. THE REASON BEHIND PAINS OF DELIVERY
    MENSES IN THE BIBLE
    AFTER AN INTERCOURSE
    REJOICE WITH THEM !!
    WOMAN'S VEIL IN THE BIBLE
    WOMAN IS NOT THE GLORY OF GOD
    REMAIN SILENCE!
    SILENCE IN CHURCHES
    WOMAN IS EVIL !
    GOD MAKES PEOPLE FALL IN ADULTERY
    HIDE WOMAN'S VOICE !
    WOMAN FOR THE MAN
    HOW TO RESCUE HER HUSBAND
    MARRIAGE BY FORCE !!
    WHAT IF HE REFUSES ?
    UPRIGHT WOMEN!
    KILL WOMEN, CHILDREN, ANIMALS !!
    KILLING, KIDNAPPING, SLAVERY
    STEALING WOMEN!!
    KILL THEM AND TAKE THEIR PROPERTIES



    1.1 Veils and Other Coverings
    1.1.1.The Old Testament
    1.1.1.1 The Veil and Christianity – niqab
    1.1. IV the Bible on women and their hair
    1. THE REASON BEHIND PAINS OF DELIVERY
    [Gen 3:16]
    God said to Eve when she tempted Adam, "I will greatly multiply your pain in childbearing, in pain you shall bring forth children, yet your desire shall be for your husband and he shall rule over you.

    MENSES IN THE BIBLE
    [Levi. 15:19]
    When a woman has a discharge of blood which in her regular discharge from her body, she shall be apart seven days. And WHOSOEVER TOUCHES HER SHALL BE UNCLEAN until the evening. And every thing that she lies upon in her SEPARATION shall be unclean. Every thing also that SHE SITS UPON SHALL BE UNCLEAN. And whosoever touches her bed shall wash his clothes and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the evening. And whosoever touches anything THAT SHE SAT UPON SHALL WASH HIS CLOTHES, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the evening.

    And if it be on her bed, or any thing whereon she sits when he touches it: he SHALL BE UNCLEAN UNTIL THE EVENING. And if any man lie with her at all, and her flowers be upon him: he shall be unclean seven days, and all the bed WHEREON SHE LIES SHALL BE UNCLEAN.
    And if a woman have an issue of her blood many days out of the time of her separation, or if it run beyond the time of her SEPARATION: All the days of the issue of her uncleanness shall be as the days of her SEPARATION, she shall be unclean. Every bed whereon she lies all the days of her issue shall be unto her as the bed of her SEPARATION, and whatsoever she sits upon shall be unclean, as the uncleanness of her SEPARATION.
    And WHOSOEVER TOUCHES THOSE THINGS SHALL BE UNCLEAN and shall wash his clothes and bathes himself in water, and he BE UNCLEAN UNTIL THE EVENING. But if she be cleansed of her issue, then she shall number to herself seven days, and after that she shall be clean. And on the eighth day she shall take unto her two turtles or two young pigeons, and bring them unto the priest to the door of the meeting tent.
    POSTPARTUM IN THE BIBLE
    [Levi. 12:2]
    If a woman conceives, and bears a MALE CHILD, then she shall be unclean seven days.. But if she bears a FEMALE CHILD then she shall be unclean two weeks.

    AFTER AN INTERCOURSE
    [Levi. 15:16]
    If a man has an emission of semen, he shall bathe his whole body in water, and be unclean until the evening. Every garment and every skin on which the semen comes shall be washed with water, and be unclean until the evening.

    [Levi. 22:17] WHEN THE SUN IS DOWN HE SHALL BE CLEAN.
    [Levi. 15:18]
    If a man lies with a woman and has an emission of semen both of them shall bathe themselves in water, and be unclean until the evening.

    REJOICE WITH THEM !!
    [Prov. 5:18]
    REJOICE WITH THE WIFE of your youth. Let her be as the loving hind and pleasant roe; LET HER BREASTS SATISFY YOU AT ALL TIMES.

    [Song. 8:8]
    We have a little sister, and she has no breasts. What shall we do for our sister on the day when is spoken for? I was a wall, and MY BREASTS WERE LIKE TOWERS.

    WOMAN'S VEIL IN THE BIBLE
    [1 Corin. 11:5]
    But any woman who prays and prophecies with her head unveiled dishonors her head - it is the same as if her head were shaven, for if a woman will not veil herself then she should cut off her hair. But if it is disgraceful for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her wear a veil. JUDGE FOR YOURSELVES; is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? (It seems that Christians are unaware of the obligation of the veil in the Bible, which made me put their verses in this book, and for those who attack the veil in Islam should notice these verses of their own Bible, and notice also this verse "Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get.)

    WOMAN IS NOT THE GLORY OF GOD
    [1 Corin. 11:7]
    For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man, for man was not made for woman, but woman from man, neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.

    REMAIN SILENCE!
    [1 Tim 2:11-14]
    Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

    SILENCE IN CHURCHES
    [1 Corin 14:34]
    Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to
    speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

    WOMAN IS EVIL !
    [Zech. 5:7]
    The leaden cover was lifted, there was a woman sitting, and he (the angel) said: this is wickedness.


    GOD MAKES PEOPLE FALL IN ADULTERY
    [Amos 7:16]
    God said to Am-a-zi'ah "You say, prophesy not against Israel and drop not your word against the house of Isaac?
    Thus the Lord says: YOUR WIFE SHALL BE AN HARLOT in the city and your sons and your daughters shall fall by the sword."

    [Jer. 8:9]
    They have rejected the word of the Lord. Therefore I WILL GIVE THEIR WIVES UNTO OTHERS.
    [Jer. 13:22]
    "For the greatness of your iniquity are your skirts discovered, AND YOUR HEELS MADE BARE. I will discover your skirts upon your face, that your shame may appear I have seen your adulteries, and your neighings the lewdness of your whoredoms."

    HIDE WOMAN'S VOICE !
    [1 Corin. 14:34]
    The woman should keep silence in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, as even the law says. If there is any thing they desire to know let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.

    [1 Timo. 2:9]
    Woman should adorn themselves modestly and sensibly in seemly apparel, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly attire but by good deeds.

    WOMAN FOR THE MAN
    [1 Corin 11:5-10]
    But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovereddishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man. For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels."

    HOW TO RESCUE HER HUSBAND
    [Deut. 25:11]
    When men fight with one another, and the wife of the one draws near to rescue her husband from the hand of him who is beating him, and puts out her hand seizes him by the private parts, then you shall cut off her hand; your eye shall have not pity.

    MARRIAGE BY FORCE !!
    [Deut. 25:5]
    If brothers dwell together, and one of them dies and has no son, the wife of the dead shall not be marries outside of the family to a stranger; her husband's brother shall go into her, and take her as his wife.

    WHAT IF HE REFUSES ?
    [Deut. 25:7]
    And if the man does not wish to take his brother's wife then his brother's wife shall go up to the gate of the elders, and say, "My husband's brother refuses to perpetuate his brother's name in Israel.. Then the elders of his city shall call him.

    And if he persists.. Then his brother's wife shall go up to him in the presence of the elders, and pull his sandal off his foot, and spit in his face; and shall answer and say: So it shall be done to the man who does not build up his brother's house. And the name of his house shall be called in Israel THE HOUSE OF HIM THAT HAD HIS SANDAL PULLED OFF.
    UPRIGHT WOMEN!
    [Eccless 7:26-28]
    And I find more bitter than death the woman who is a snare, whose heart is a trap and whose hands are chains. The man who pleases God will escape her, but the sinner she will ensnare....while I was still searching but not finding, I found one upright man among a thousand but not one upright woman among them all".

    KILL WOMEN, CHILDREN, ANIMALS !!
    [Ezek. 9:5]
    And the Lord said, "Go through the city, and smite: let not your eye spare, neither have you pity. SLAY UTTERLY OLD AND YOUNG, BOTH MAIDS AND LITTLE CHILDREN, AND WOMEN.
    [Num. 31:1]
    And the Lord said unto Moses, "Avenge the children of the Mid'-an'ites.. They warred against the Mid'-i-an'ites, as the Lord commanded Moses, and they slay all the males. And they took all women as captives, and their little ones, and took the spoil of all their cattle, and all their flocks, and all their goods. And they burnt all their cities wherein they dwelt, and all their goodly castles, with fire.

    Moses said, "HAVE YOU SAVED ALL THE WOMEN ALIVE? NOW KILL EVERY MALE AMONG THE LITTLE ONES, AND KILL EVERY WOMAN that has known a man by lying with him, but all the young girls who have not known a man by lying with him keep alive for yourselves.
    [Josh 6:16]
    Joshua said to the people of Israel, "The Lord has given you the city (of the Canaanites).. all silver, and gold, and vessels of brass and iron, are consecrated unto the Lord: They shall come into the treasury of the Lord. The people utterly DESTROYED ALL THAT WAS IN THE CITY, BOTH MAN AND WOMAN, YOUNG AND OLD, AND OX AND SHEEP, AND ASS, WITH THE EDGE OF THE SWORD.

    KILLING, KIDNAPPING, SLAVERY
    [Josh. 16:10]
    So the Canaanites have dwelt in the midst of E'phraim to this day, but become slaves to do forced labour. (see also Joshua 17:13 and Judg. 1:30)
    [Judg. 21:10]
    The congregation of Benjamin sent twelve thousand of their bravest men, and commanded them, "Go and smite the inhabitants of Ja'-besh-gil'ead with the edge of the sword; also the women and the little ones. Every male and every
    woman that has lain with a male YOU SHALL UTTERLY DESTROY.

    And they found among the inhabitants four hundred YOUNG VIRGINS who had not known a man by lying with him; and they brought them to the camp of Shiloh, which is the land of Canaan. And Benjamin returned at that time, and they gave them the women whom they had saved alive of the women of Ja'besh-gil'ead, but they did not suffice for them.
    STEALING WOMEN!!
    And they commanded the Benjaminites, saying:"Go and lie in wait in the vineyard, and watch, if the daughters of Shiloh go out to dance in the dances, then come out of the vineyard and seize each man his wife from the daughters of Shiloh. And the Benjaminites did so, and took their wives from the dancers whom they caught.
    KILL THEM AND TAKE THEIR PROPERTIES
    [Deut. 20:10]
    When you draw near to a city to fight against it, offer terms of peace to it. And if its answer to you is peace and it opens to you, then all the people who are found in it SHALL BE FORCED LABOUR FOR YOU AND SHALL SERVE YOU.

    But if it makes no peace with you, then you shall besiege it, .. YOU SHALL PUT ALL ITS MALES TO THE SWORD, BUT THE WOMEN AND THE LITTLE ONES, the cattle and every thing else in the city all its spoil, YOU SHALL TAKE AS BOOTY FOR YOURSELVES; AND YOU SHALL ENJOY THE SPOIL OF YOUR ENEMIES.
    In other words, the Bible teaches us that:
    1.Women should learn in silence and subjugation.
    2.Women should not teach.
    3.Women should not have authority over men but should remain silent.
    4.Adam and Eve were not equal in sin. Adam was not deceived but Eve was.
    5.Women are commanded to be under obedience to men. God ordained that men shall for all time rule over women
    6.Women must keep silent in Churches. It is shameful for them to open their mouths therein. If they have a question they should ask their husbands before going to church and then their husbands will ask for them in the church.
    7.A woman should neither pray nor profess with her head uncovered.
    8.If a woman prays with her head uncovered then she might as well shave her head.
    9.Man was created in the image and glory of God, and Woman was created in the glory of Man, thus Man must have power over her.
    10.Any woman who delivers a male baby shall be unclean for one week. But any woman who delivers a female baby shall be unclean for TWO weeks. Thus, females make their mothers DOUBLY unclean as compared to males.
    11.While it is possible to find one upright man in every thousand, it is impossible to find even one single upright woman in every thousand
    12.Woman is a snare, her heart is a trap, and her hands are chains. The man who pleases God will escape her, but she will ensnare the sinner.
    13.If a woman had her period and touches a chair or a bed or anything else then that item immediately becomes unclean. Anyone who then touches those things shall also become unclean. They must then bathe themselves and wash their clothes because they have touched an item that a menstruous woman has touched.




    1.1 Veils and Other Coverings




    Western nuns
    A veil forms part of the headdress of some religious orders of nuns or religious sisters ; this is why a woman who becomes a nun is said “to take the veil”. In many orders, a white veil is used as the “veil of probation” during novitiate, and a dark veil for the “veil of profession” once first vows are taken; the color scheme varies with the color scheme of the habit of the order. A veil of consecration, longer and fuller, is used by some orders for final profession of solemn perpetual vows.
    Nuns are the female counterparts of monks, and many monastic orders of women have retained the veil. Other orders, of religious sisters who are not cloistered but who work as teachers, nurses or in other “active” apostolates outside of a monastery, have abolished the use of the veil, or adopted a modified, short version; a few never had a veil to start with, but used a bonnet-style headdress even a century ago. The fullest versions of the nun’s veil cover the top of the head and flow down around and over the shoulders. In Western Christianity, it does not wrap around the neck or face. In those orders that retain one, the starched white covering about the face neck and shoulders is known as a wimple and is a separate garment. The Catholic Church has revived the practice of allowing women to profess vows as consecrated virgins; women who take the vows of religion without belonging to a particular order but who are under the direct care of the local bishop. These women may be given a veil as a sign of consecration. There has also been renewed interest in the last half century in the ancient practice of women and men dedicating themselves as anchorites or hermits, and there is a formal process whereby such persons can seek recognition of their vows by the local bishop; a veil for these women would also be traditional. Some Anglican women’s religious orders also wear a veil, differing according to the traditions of each order.
    Eastern monasticism
    In Eastern Orthodoxy and in the Eastern Rites of the Catholic Church, a veil called an epanokamelavkion is used by both nuns and monks, in both cases covering completely the kamilavkion, a cylindrical hat worn by both monks and nuns. In Slavic practice, when the veil is worn over the kamilavkion, the entire headdress is referred to as a klobuk. Nuns wear an additional veil under the klobuk, called an apostolnik, which is drawn together to cover the neck and shoulders as well as their heads, leaving the face itself open.

    لتحميل كتبي فضلاً الضغط على الصورة التالية - متجدد بإذن الله

    نقره لتكبير أو تصغير الصورة ونقرتين لعرض الصورة في صفحة مستقلة بحجمها الطبيعي



  2. #112
    تاريخ التسجيل
    Sep 2006
    المشاركات
    1,550
    الدين
    الإسلام
    آخر نشاط
    22-03-2017
    على الساعة
    08:38 AM

    افتراضي



    Veils in Mormonism


    Mormon women also wear a veil as part of ritual temple clothing. This veil, along with the entire temple ritual clothing, is worn only inside the temple. Normally, the veil is worn off the face; it is lowered to cover the face of the wearer during prayer, as part of the temple ritual.


    Mormons who have undertaken the temple ritual will typically be buried in this clothing. During the viewing of the body, the face remains unveiled. Immediately prior to the closing and sealing of the casket, the veil is lowered over the face of the deceased.






    by COGwriter


    Some have been confused about whether women need to wear veils or hats to church services or while praying. An acquaintance recently asked me to look into I Corinthians 11:2-16 regarding the subject of women wearing veils and local customs. This paper is intended as a brief, biblically-based, review of the subject.


    I Corinthians 11:2-16


    As most of the confusion about this matter centers in I Corinthians 11:2-16, it is probably best to first list the NKJV translation of the passage:


    "2 Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you.


    3 But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.


    4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonors his head.


    5 But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved.


    6 For if a woman is not covered, let her also be shorn. But if it is shameful for a woman to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered.


    7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man.


    8 For man is not from woman, but woman from man.


    9 Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man.


    10 For this reason the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.


    11 Nevertheless, neither is man independent of woman, nor woman independent of man, in the Lord.


    12 For as woman came from man, even so man also comes through woman; but all things are from God.


    13 Judge among yourselves. Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered?


    14 Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him?


    15 But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her for a covering.


    16 But if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor do the churches of God".


    Reading this passage in NKJV English clearly shows that the context has to do with hair length. Hair length is specifically referred to in verses 5, 14, and 15 and is clearly and directly mentioned. Although it may be inferred that verses 5 and 6 allows for the possible concept of veils, no veil is directly mentioned, nor does the context require that veils are alluded to. On


    e simple truth is that a woman with short hair can be shorn and thus verse 6 does not require that a veil is being referred to. And verse 15 specifically states that a woman's long hair, not a veil, is given to her for a covering.


    And while long hair is encouraged for women, head coverings are not prohibited for them. And if a women is bald, that type of covering would possibly be required--but if she can have long hair, a veil is not required.


    Greek


    Of course, the New Testament was not written in English, as it was nearly exclusively written in Greek. It is my limited understanding that those who have a different interpretation than the Church of God has historically held are mainly basing it on how a certain Greek word, akatakaluptosἀκατακάλυπτος, ον, is translated. Akatakaluptos means uncovered or possibly unveiled and is only used in the Bible in verses 5 and 13 of I Corinthians 11. It apparently comes from the Greek words a (which is a negative participle), kata (which means according to, down, or against), and kalupto (which means cover up).








    When Paul wanted to convey being unveiled (which he apparently did in II Corinthians 3:18), he used the Greek term anakalupto (combination of ana and kalupto), but this may have been referring to a masculine, not feminine, veil.


    The Greek word for veil in the New Testament is kaluma, but it is only used in the Bible to refer to Moses' veil (II Corinthians 3:13-16). However, since the Hebrew words in the Old Testament for Moses' veil and a woman's veil are different, this does not appear to shed any light on this subject. However, what is clear is that there is no other Greek term used in the New Testament directly referring to a woman's veil (the only other term translated as veil in the New Testament has to do with a curtain). Thus it is not clear from the Greek that a woman's veil is being referred to in I Corinthians.





    لتحميل كتبي فضلاً الضغط على الصورة التالية - متجدد بإذن الله

    نقره لتكبير أو تصغير الصورة ونقرتين لعرض الصورة في صفحة مستقلة بحجمها الطبيعي



  3. #113
    تاريخ التسجيل
    Sep 2006
    المشاركات
    1,550
    الدين
    الإسلام
    آخر نشاط
    22-03-2017
    على الساعة
    08:38 AM

    افتراضي


    1.1.1. The Old Testament
    There are no indications in the Old Testament that a woman should wear a veil to Church or when praying. In Genesis, when a veil is mentioned, it appears to be for the purposes of veiling oneself before a certain man (24:65;38:14,19).
    In the Song of Solomon, two words are translated as veil--one that possibly appears to mean hair locks (4:1,3;6:7) and the other that apparently means veil (5:7). But in none of those verses does it mention praying, prophesying, or church attendance.
    The only other verse in regarding a woman's veil in the Old Testament is Isaiah 47:2 where the 'virgin daughter of Babylon' (verse 1) is shamed (verse 3). The word translated as veil may mean 'locks' as that is how BibleSoft translates it. That would be consistent with Paul's comment that it is a shame for a woman to have short hair (I Corinthians 11:6). Paul never said it was a shame to not wear a veil.
    These verses in Genesis, Song of Solomon, and Isaiah appear to be the only verses in the Old Testament that a veil is mentioned (the other type of veil mentioned is a curtain-like object, which is a different Hebrew word, and it is never mentioned in the context of a woman's covering).
    Each time a woman is mentioned in the Old Testament praying or prophesying, there is never a mention of a veil (i.e. I Samuel 1:10-13).
    Furthermore, although the Bible mentions various aspects regarding holy convocations (i.e. Leviticus 23; Deuteronomy 16) and the congregation of Israel (e.g. Deuteronomy 23:1-8), the wearing of a veil for any woman is never even hinted.
    Perhaps it should be mentioned in the Old Testament, in Leviticus 16:4-21 the high priest (who was always male) was told to pray and attend services while wearing head ware (see also Zechariah 3:5-7). Job wore a turban when he made judgments (Job 29:14). Ezekiel was told by God to prophesy while wearing a turban (Ezekiel 24:17-24). But as the Apostle Paul wrote, there was a change in the administration of the priesthood after Jesus was resurrected (Hebrews 7:11-12), hence this would explain why true Christian leaders have short hair. Thus, in accordance the New Testament admonition that males NOT have their heads covered true Christian male leaders do not have long hair, nor do they wear head coverings like hats, mitres, or veils when they publicly pray.
    Paul
    Paul, on at least two other occasions in the New Testament appeals to nature as proof of some doctrinal position: Romans 1:19-20, where Paul indicates that the natural creation should show people God's attributes and Romans 1:26-27, where Paul indicates it is natural for a man to have sexual relations with a woman, but not another man. On each occasion, it is to something natural that Paul is referring to. Since veils are not natural, a woman's hair length would seem to be the only logical reference to what nature is teaching in I Corinthians 11:2-16.
    Paul also wrote, "24 And let us consider one another in order to stir up love and good works, 25 not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as is the manner of some, but exhorting one another, and so much the more as you see the Day approaching" (Hebrews 10:24-25). Here Paul is telling people to attend Church.
    James warned, "2 For if there should come into your assembly a man with gold rings, in fine apparel, and there should also come in a poor man in filthy clothes, 3 and you pay attention to the one wearing the fine clothes and say to him, "You sit here in a good place," and say to the poor man, "You stand there," or, "Sit here at my footstool," 4 have you not shown partiality among yourselves, and become judges with evil thoughts?" (James 2:2-4). Hence James seems to be warning against treating someone who attends services wearing something better than one who cannot afford such things-clothing was fairly expensive in those days.
    Peter admonished, "3 Do not let your adornment be merely outward--arranging the hair, wearing gold, or putting on fine apparel-- 4 rather let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the incorruptible beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is very precious in the sight of God. 5 For in this manner, in former times, the holy women who trusted in God also adorned themselves, being submissive to their own husbands" (I Peter 3:3-5). Peter seems to be warning about trying to make hair too fancy, if all women were required to wear veils, it would seem that he would have probably mentioned them there. Furthermore, since the women in former times were never commanded in the Old Testament to wear veils, this suggests that veils were never required.
    With all these verses in mind, it does not make sense that Paul was installing a new rule about women wearing veils.

    In the Old Testament
    The Hebrew word for veil, covering, and head are as follows:
    Veil – (radiyd raw-deed'רדיד) in the sense of spreading, something spread, wide wrapper (tsa`iyph tsaw-eef') meaning to wrap over, veil, wrapper, shawl
    tsa`iyph(tsaw-eef') צָעִיף

    Usage: This word is used3 times:
    Genesis 24:65: "Itismy master: therefore she tooka veil,and covered herself."
    Genesis 38:14: "garments off from her, and covered
    her with a veil,and wrapped herself, and sat in an open"

    Genesis 38:19: "And she arose, and went away, and laid by
    her veil from her, and put on the garments"
    Read more:http://www.bibletools.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Lexicon.show/ID/H6809/tsa%60iyph.htm#ixzz2EN5Eux83
    Covering – (mikceh mik-seh') a covering. (kacuwth kes-ooth) raiment, clothing, vesture.
    Head – (rosh roshe) head, chief, beginning.
    In the New Testament
    Veil – (katapetasma kat-ap-et-as-mahκαταπέτασμα, ατος, τό) a veil spread out.
    STRONGS NT 2665: καταπέτασμα
    καταπέτασμα,καταπετάσματος,τό(καταπετάννυμιto spread out over, to cover), anAlex.Greek word forπαραπέτασμα. which the other Greeks use fromHerodotusdown;a veil spread out, a curtain— the name given in the Greek Scriptures, as well as in the writings ofPhiloandJosephus, to the two curtains in the temple at Jerusalem (τάκαταπετάσματα, 1 Macc. 4:51; (yet cf. Edersheim, Jesus the Messiah, 2:611)): one of them (Hebrewמָסָך) at the entrance of the temple separated the Holy place from the outer court (Exodus 26:37;Exodus 38:18;Numbers 3:26;Josephus,b. j.5, 5, 4; it is called alsoτόκάλυμμαby theSept.andPhilo,Exodus 27:16;Numbers 3:25;Philo, vit. Moys. 3: §§ 5 and 9), the other veiled the Holy of holies from the Holy place (in Hebrew theפָּרֹכֶת;ἐνδοτερονκαταπέτασμα,Josephus, Antiquities 8, 3, 3;τόἐσωτατονκαταπέτασμαPhilode gig. § 12; by theSept.andPhilothis is called pre-eminentlyτόκαταπέτασμα,Exodus 26:31ff;Leviticus 21:23;Leviticus 24:3;Philo, vit. Moys. as above). This latterκαταπέτασμαis the only one mentioned in the N. T.:τόκαταπέτασματοῦναοῦ,Matthew 27:51;Mark 15:38;Luke 23:45;τόδεύτερονκαταπέτασμα,Hebrews 9:3;τόἐσώτεροντοῦκαταπετάσματος(cf.Leviticus 16:2, 12, 15;Exodus 26:33)the space more inward them the veil,equivalent to 'the space within the veil,' i. e. the Holy of holies, figuratively used of heaven, as the true abode of God,Hebrews 6:19; in a similar figurative way the body of Christ is called καταπέτασμα, in (Heb.), because, as the veil had to be removed in order that the high priest might enter the most holy part of the earthly temple, so the body of Christ had to be removed by his death on the cross, that an entrance might be opened into the fellowship of God in heaven.



    http://biblesuite.com/greek/2665.htm
    Covering – (peribolaion per-ib-ol'-ah-yon) covering, vesture, mantle, a covering thrown around.
    STRONGS NT 4018: περιβόλαιον

    περιβόλαιον,περιβολαίου,τό(περιβάλλω), properly, a covering thrown around, a wrapper; in the N. T.
    1. a mantle:Hebrews 1:12(Psalm 101:27();Ezekiel 16:13;Ezekiel 27:7;Isaiah 59:17;περιβόλαιονβασιλικόνandπεριβόλαιονἐκπορφύρας, Palaeph. 52, 4).
    2. a veil (A. V. a covering):1 Corinthians 11:15. ((From Euripides down.))



    Head – (kephale kef-al-ay) head (physical or by ranking), supreme, chief, prominent.
    In studying

    the text of first Corinthians eleven we must understand we need the Holy Spirit to help us, and furthermore
    all Scripture should be taken seriously and thoroughly examined. Also, we must read it as it was intended, that is, as a letter to fellow Christians written by inspiration from the Holy Spirit by the Apostle Paul. We see from the start the text goes against what we're "programmed" to believe in America. Also
    it's not taught in the body of Christ as it should be today. Many so-called pastors and leaders simply look at it and conclude "it's not for us today" which is incorrect. Who said we can pick and choose what to obey and not obey. For the first 1800 years of Christianity the material veil was a part of the woman’s modest clothes. She made it the same way she made the rest of her clothes. It was more then just fashion it was obedience to a command.
    To take off this veil in public in the first century would announce that you are a woman of loose morals.
    "Be ye followers of me, even as I also [am] of Christ. Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered [them] to you. But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman [is] the man; and the head of Christ [is] God. Every man praying or prophesying, having [his] head covered, dishonoureth his head. But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with [her] head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. For a man indeed ought not to cover [his] head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man. For this cause ought the woman to have power on [her] head because of the angels. Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord. For as the woman [is] of the man, even so [is] the man also by the woman; but all things of God. Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered? Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for [her] hair is given her for a covering. But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God." (1 Corinthians 11:1-16)
    لتحميل كتبي فضلاً الضغط على الصورة التالية - متجدد بإذن الله

    نقره لتكبير أو تصغير الصورة ونقرتين لعرض الصورة في صفحة مستقلة بحجمها الطبيعي



  4. #114
    تاريخ التسجيل
    Sep 2006
    المشاركات
    1,550
    الدين
    الإسلام
    آخر نشاط
    22-03-2017
    على الساعة
    08:38 AM

    افتراضي





    1.1.1.1 The Veil and Christianity – niqab
    Roman Pronouncement?
    Many seem to believe that Linus of Rome first required that women should not attend church services without covering their heads. Here is a claims made by many Roman Catholics about him:
    2. LINUS, ST. (67-76)...He made disposition for women to be admitted to the holy places and attend functions with their heads covered...(Lopes A. The Popes: The lives of the pontiffs through 2000 years of history. Futura Edizoni, Roma, 1997, p. 1).
    Is that true?
    Here is some of what the Catholic scholar J.P. Kirsch wrote in The Catholic Encyclopedia about Linus:
    The "Liber Pontificalis" asserts that Linus's home was in Tuscany, and that his father's name was Herculanus; but we cannot discover the origin of this assertion. According to the same work on the popes, Linus is supposed to have issued a decree "in conformity with the ordinance of St. Peter", that women should have their heads covered in church. Without doubt this decree is apocryphal, and copied by the author of the "Liber Pontificalis" from the first Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians (11:5) and arbitrarily attributed to the first successor of the Apostle in Rome. (Kirsch J.P. Transcribed by Gerard Haffner. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume IX. Copyright © 1910 by Robert Appleton Company. Online Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. Knight. Nihil Obstat, October 1, 1910. Remy Lafort, Censor. Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York).
    In other words, Roman Catholic scholars admit that Linus did not do what the Vatican book says he did, and that this head covering statement was arbitrarily attributed to Linus. He did not make it.
    Custom
    In some parts of the world, woman traditionally wear head ware to church services. Unless they are intending to imitate some pagan custom, there is no verse in the Bible that prohibits them from doing so. If due to style, custom, necessity (sun/rain/cold), or tradition, a woman wants to wear appropriate head ware, this seems to be fine. It is also fine if she thinks she needs to as Paul wrote, "We then who are strong ought to bear with the scruples of the weak, and not to please ourselves" (Romans 15:1) and "for whatever is not from faith is sin" (Romans 14:23). However, should other women be required to do so who do not believe they should not? No, as Paul also wrote, "1 Receive one who is weak in the faith, but not to disputes over doubtful things…13 Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather resolve this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother's way" (Romans 14:1,13).
    Wearing veils is a doubtful thing. There is no requirement in the Old Testament, nor any example, of any woman wearing a veil while praying, prophesying, or attending services. There are several examples of males in the Old Testament wearing head gear while praying, prophesying, and attending services--but not a single one for women.
    The context of I Corinthians 11:2-16 is clearly hair. Hair is definitely and specifically mentioned. Although the Greek supports the concept that veils might be alluded to, this is only a possible allusion, not a clear requirement. While Peter clearly taught, "We ought to obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29), he also supported the concept that the leadership of the Church is authorized to clarify unclear matters (Acts 15:6-29).
    Conclusion
    It is my understanding that a woman can be in the Church of God and wear a veil or other head covering as long as she is not trying to promote disputes over doubtful things. A woman can clearly be in the Church of God and not wear a veil or similar head covering. Even though some might conclude based on various interpretations of the Greek that veils may be the subject of I Corinthians 11:2-16, it is obvious when the entire Bible is reviewed that this is not the appropriate doctrinal interpretation.
    The context of I Corinthians 11:2-16 is clearly hair. There is simply insufficient scriptural justification to insist that women wear veils or similar head coverings to attend church services. Some may wish to believe otherwise, but that is not something they should be proclaiming. The scripture is simply not clear enough to require veils and the judgment of the Church on this matter should be sufficiently proper for those who accept Philadelphia era Church governance. Hopefully those who prefer to hold a different position on veils will understand that the Church's judgment on this matter is appropriate.
    Thiel B. Veils and Other Coverings. www.cogwriter.com (c) 2004/2005/2006/2008/2012 0915
    http://www.cogwriter.com/veils.htm


    1.1.IV the Bible on women and their hair
    Several people have written to The Refiner's Fire to enquire about the biblical stance on women's hair; specifically concerning hair covering and hair dying. This article examines all angles.
    To begin with, let's see exactly what the Bible says about women's hair:
    1 Corinthians 11: 3. And I desire that you know that the head of every man is the Mashiyach, and the head of the woman is the man, and the head of the Mashiyach is Elohim. 4. Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered, dishonors his head. 5. And every woman, who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered, dishonors her head; for she is on a level with her whose head is shaven. 6. For if a woman be not covered, let her also be shorn; but if it be shameful for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered....13. Judge for yourselves, among yourselves; is it becoming that a woman pray to Elohim with her head uncovered?[1] 14. Does not nature teach you that in a man, if his hair grows long, it is a reproach to him? 15. But for a woman, if her hair is abundant, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her for a covering.[1]
    Footnotes:
    [1] It's a shame for a man to grow long hair, if his goal is to look like a woman. Torah requires that there be a clear distinction between male and female (Deuteronomy 22:5). Each person must be clearly recognizable according to their natural birth gender. Long hair on a man is NOT the sole issue; those taking Nazarite vows wore long hair some for life (Samson) and others for a season. Paul himself took a Nazarite vow. Rav Shaul is teaching against pagan sexuality practices, of those who do things to make themselves appear as the opposite gender. This an issue of gender distinction and understanding the Image of Elohim in both male and female.
    [2]Or rather, as an additional covering, i.e., on top of proper clothing for worship and having her head covered. This does not mean a woman's hair is in place of a head covering.
    According to the passage above:
    It is disgraceful for women to shave their hair.
    "Abundant" hair is a glory.
    Women must pray with their heads covered; their hair does not count as a covering.
    While "abundant" hair is a glory, this does not mean women cannot cut or curl their hair to make it look its best. Not everyone has the good fortune to be born with thick and/or luxurious hair, and there is nothing wrong with cutting it into a nice style that suits our faces and figures. We are simply not to cut our hair into anything resembling a "masculine" style. Our bodies are, after all, YHWH's vessels and we are commanded to take care of them, from top to bottom and the inside-out (1 Cor. 6:19):
    1 Corinthians 6: 19. Or don't you know, that your body is the temple of the Ruach haKodesh who abides in you, whom you have received from Elohim? And you are not your own. 20. For you are bought with a price. Therefore you glorify Elohim with your body, and with your spirit, which are Elohim's.
    Just like the Bible does not say women have to wear dresses (after all men wore "dresses" in the old days before pants were invented!), the Bible also does NOT say they cannot cut their hair. It just says women dishonor themselves if they shave their heads, as we saw above.
    There are no discussions in the Bible concerning the dyeing of hair because that wasn't an issue until modern times. However, there are many references that suggest "elders" are wise men and women to be respected; that the "changing seasons" of our lives are normal and natural, and that growing old is basically a badge of honor, including the graying of our hair:
    Proverbs 16: 31 Gray hair is a crown of glory; it is gained in a righteous life.
    Since the Bible does not prohibit changing the color of our hair, in this particular case, it is probably safe to say that it's up to each individual to decide what to do. YHWH wants us to take care of ourselves and look our best (we are, after all His vessels!), and if dyeing our hair makes us look better, there seems to be no biblical reason why we shouldn't - unless, of course, one is going for something unnatural, such as people who dye their hair purple and green, etc. in their attempt to "stand out" and draw attention to themselves. (We must remember, this life is not all about us; it's about God and our preparation for meeting Him one day - spiritual preparation that includes staying in the Word and learning to obey His Torah.)
    YHWH has always been adamant about the roles and conduct of each gender. He made it very clear that women are to "act feminine" and dress modestly:
    Deuteronomy 22: 5 "A woman is not to wear men's clothing, and a man is not to put on women's clothing, for whoever does these things is detestable to ADONAI your God.
    1 Timothy 2: 9. So also, that women (appear) in a chaste fashion of dress; and that their adorning be with modesty and chastity; not with curls or with gold, or with pearls, or with splendid robes; 10. but with good works as is becoming to women who profess reverence for Elohim.
    1 Peter 3: 3. And don't adorn yourselves with the external ornaments of curls of the hair, or of golden trinkets or of costly garments. 4. But adorn yourselves in the hidden person of the heart with a mild and pure spirit, an ornament that is precious before Elohim. 5. For so also the Set Apart women of old who trusted in Elohim, adorned themselves and were subject to their husbands....
    The above obviously shows that the wearing today's micro-miniskirts and revealing cleavage, etc., is not allowed or acceptable!
    An interesting side note borrowed from the Aramaic English New Testament:
    Torah teaches that the Image of Elohim is both male and female (B'resheet/Gen. 1:27), and we learn about the unique and unified female and male attributes of YHWH in the Netzer of Isaiah 11:1-4. Rav Shaul also addressed the nature of YHWH as male and female in Romans 1:26, 27 when he spoke of male and female "natures" which are part of the Image of Elohim. The male/female characteristics are qualities that bind male and female partners together, but in the fallen world these unique differences are used to divide and destroy.
    The uniqueness of male and female attributes is heavily guarded within Torah. There are many Commandments that establish clear gender recognition, which shows distinct honor to both genders while upholding the Creator's male and female characteristics. Clearly YHWH has chosen to reveal Himself as a Father with a predominately masculine identity, but He also reveals Himself through both male and female spirits. The marriage of male and female is a picture of the divine unity within YHWH and His people. Marriage between man and woman is Set Apart unto YHWH and to be guarded by each follower of Mashiyach. It is paganism to uphold either male or female attributes over the other because they are equal; but, it is also paganism to displace the Set Apart roles of male and female that YHWH established by His Word.











    King of Austria and his wife and their daughter
    In 1916, in Vienna, Austria, the king presented his wife entirely veiled as shown below.



    The queen was entirely covered because as the queen she was not to be looked by any man.
    She was sacred and precious. And other veiled women were in the entourage also. All our Muslim women are sacred and precious, like a queen.
    Note: This photo is not photo-shopped or morphed.
    Its video still exists (2:15)
    http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=473659579576

    Not only the Queen, but many other women in the entourage also…. as in the video
    See for yourself… seek and you will find.
    Disclaimer: Just watch the video of Vienna, as a irrefutable historical proof,for the commentary has some controversial and questionable points of view.







    لتحميل كتبي فضلاً الضغط على الصورة التالية - متجدد بإذن الله

    نقره لتكبير أو تصغير الصورة ونقرتين لعرض الصورة في صفحة مستقلة بحجمها الطبيعي



  5. #115
    تاريخ التسجيل
    Sep 2006
    المشاركات
    1,550
    الدين
    الإسلام
    آخر نشاط
    22-03-2017
    على الساعة
    08:38 AM

    افتراضي




    Translation

    Part11
    Christian Head covering

    Introduction
    1. Some History
    Introduction


    To have a better understanding of what Scripture is talking about we need to define some terms. First, the teaching of head covering for Christian women is a lesson in the New Testament. It's exemplified in the Old Testament, but no specific lesson is given. Where is the passage found? In the New Testament. What is its location? The epistle to the Corinthians from Paul the apostle. What is the context? He is speaking to them about general lessons, and then introduces the topic to them specifically. Finally, and most importantly who is he speaking to? Christians! One of the interesting aspects of this doctrine is that, like a couple of others, is mentioned only once. (see foot washing) Many examples can be found but this is the "only" direct passage of it.
    There are two things that we should take note of before studying this passage. One, there are literally, and I do mean literally, thousands upon thousands of pages written on this very passage! If one were to do a search on the Internet you would be amazed at how many web sites, articles, books, and links to pages concerning this subject there is
    . Yet, it's rarely taught. Two, almost every article or book written on this subject states that "Paul says" we need to remember that Paul was used of Holy Spirit to convey God's mind on this matter, but it was not Paul himself that this teaching had its genesis. The main point I'm saying here is, it's a teaching that comes from God, and we should be very quick to obey Him.
    Below are the basic words from the Hebrew and Greek with definitions.

    1.Some History
    "Some people today consider head-covering to be of purely local cultural significance at Corinth, or something which can be expressed differently according to the prevailing cultural background. This opinion cannot be correct because all New Testament churches, whether predominantly Jewish or predominately Gentile, had the same custom (1 Cor 11:16). This eliminates the possibility that the tradition was of purely temporary or cultural significance, as follows." (BIBLICAL AUTHORITY AND HEAD-COVERINGS by R H Johnston )
    If we start from the beginning we find that the earliest reference to a headcovering is found in Genesis 24:65.
    "For she [had] said unto the servant, What man [is] this that walketh in the field to meet us? And the servant [had] said, It [is] my master: therefore she took a vail, and covered herself."
    In Genesis 6:1,2 we question what prompted the desire of the sons of God to go after the daughters of men? Perhaps they did not cover themselves?
    "And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose."
    The Hebrew word for saw in this passage carries the meaning to cause to look intently at, cause to gaze at, or give attention to. This also happens to be the same word to describe the perverted gaze of Ham, Noah's son, in Genesis 9:18. We also discover the passages in Genesis 38:14,19 concerning Tamar's duplicity.
    "And she put her widow's garments off from her, and covered her with a vail, 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…And she arose, and went away, and laid by her vail from her, and put on the garments of her widowhood."
    In this period of history women might have gone out without a vail. However, in the passage in which Rebekah "puts on a vail" it's because she is showing modesty and submissiveness. Tamar is practicing the custom of Canaanite goddess worship attire (see 2 Kings 23:7). Men in the Old Testament wore a headcovering of some kind like a turban, which is still in practice today in many Middle Eastern countries. We read of a "mitre" being issued to the priests for the ministry of the tabernacle Exodus 28:4, Leviticus 8:9, and Zechariah 3:5. Reference is also made in Ruth 3:15, and Isaiah 3:20,23; Song of Solomon 5:7 to vails and coverings for women.
    Jewish men wear a yarmulke Hebrew kipa skullcap. Some wear one at all times others only during prayer and at mealtime. The earliest Biblical reference to a headcovering is in Exodus 28:4 where it is called a mitznefet. It was part of the wardrobe of the High Priest. In other Biblical references the covering of the head and face is regarded as a sign of mourning (2 Samuel 15:30; Esther 6:12).
    The Talmud; however, associates the wearing of a head covering more with the concept of reverence to God and respect for men of stature. Yarmulke is a distorted form of the Hebrew words yaray may'Elokim meaning "in fear and awe of God." This idea is based, for the most part, on a statement made by a fifth-century Babylonian Talmudic scholar, Huna ben Joshua, who said, "I never walked four cubits with uncovered head because God dwells over my head" (from the Kiddushin 31a).
    As we move through the Old Testament into the New Testament we come across examples of those that were harlots not being covered in public (Luke 7:38; John 4). The New Testament teaches that harlots went uncovered while sober women went covered (1 Corinthians 11:1-16).
    "The Talmud states 'The sight of a woman’s hair constitutes an erotic stimulus (Berakhot 24A).' 'Jewish women, married or not, should not walk in the marketplace with their hair uncovered' (Shulhan Arukh, Even ha-Ezer 21:2)."
    In Biblical and Talmudic times women covered their heads with scarves or veils as a sign of chastity and modesty. To expose a woman's hair was considered a humiliation (Isaiah 2:17 and Berochot 24a). Some Talmudic scholars regarded the wearing of a head covering as an expression of guilt for their sin of Eve (Genesis 17:8).
    As we proceed with our examination of head coverings I would like to show a time line of head coverings, or lack thereof, from early times to the present. As we have seen the idea of any modesty or conviction of the head covering began to cease in about the 1930's. It really began to take hold in the 1950's and from that point American women have grown more and more decadent and brazen in their appearance.
    "In this country women don't cover their heads anymore for no other reason than "that's the way we do it now" or "just because we don't cover them anymore." That's about as logical as saying, "I kill because I do." I've heard reasons like "that was for back then, in their time and culture" etc. Such reasoning is illogical and dishonest at best. It completely ignores the fact that even in this country, women wore them universally just over a hundred years ago."
    Below are various quotes, pro and con, as to the head covering. We simply quote them for comparison and in no way agree with all, parts, or positions of those quoted.
    Hermas (AD 150)
    "A virgin meets me, adorned as if she were proceeding from the bridal chamber...her head was covered by a hood."
    Clement of Alexandria (153-217 a.d.)
    Clement also understands the words in 1 Corinthians 11:5 to refer to a veil of fabric and not to a woman's hair.
    "And she will never fall, who puts before her eyes modesty, and her shawl; nor will she invite another to fall into sin by uncovering her face. For this is the wish of the Word, since it is becoming for her to pray veiled" [1 Corinthians 11:5 GLP].
    "It has also been commanded that the head should be veiled and the face covered. For it is a wicked thing for beauty to be a snare to men.
    Tertullian (AD 198)
    "…Why do you uncover before God what you cover before men? Will you be more modest in public than in Church? Be veiled virgin."
    "How severe a chastisement will they likewise deserve, who during the psalms—and at every mention of God—remain uncovered."
    Hippolytus (170-236 a.d.)
    To Hippolytus, a church father from Rome, is wrongly ascribed the following canon for worship (though perhaps wrongly ascribed to Hippolytus, it appears to represent the practice of the church of that time in worship).
    "Canon Seventeenth. Of virgins, that they should cover their faces and their heads."
    John Chrysostom (340-407 a.d.)
    Chrysostom was the preacher of Antioch. The following excerpts are taken from Homily XXVI (1 Corinthians 11:2-16). Chrysostom identifies the problem Paul addresses in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 as
    "Their women used to pray and prophesy unveiled and with their head bare." Especially to the point of a woman needing a separate head covering other than her long hair (cf. 1 Cor. 11:15) is the following remark: "' And if it be given her for a covering,' say you, 'wherefore need she add another covering?' That not nature only, but also her own will may have part in her acknowledgment of subjection. For that thou oughtest to be covered nature herself by anticipation enacted a law. Add now, I pray, thine own part also, that thou mayest not seem to subvert the very laws of nature; a proof of most insolent rashness, to buffet not only with us, but with nature also."
    "It follows that being covered is a mark of subjection and authority. For it induces her to look down and be ashamed and preserve entire her proper virtue. For the virtue and honor of the governed is to abide in his obedience." (Chrysostom.HOMILY XXVI. ON THE VEILING OF WOMEN.)
    Apostolic Constitutions (AD 390)
    "When you are in the streets, cover your head. For by such a covering, you will avoid being viewed by idle persons…."
    Jerome (345-429 a.d.)
    "Though Scripture does not endorse the practice of virgins shaving their heads (rather the Scripture condemns such a practice in 1 Corinthians 11:14-15), nevertheless Jerome is quoted here because he clearly understood Paul to be teaching that a woman ought to wear a fabric head covering upon her head (this is especially obvious in this case for the virgin's head was shaved of all hair).
    "It is usual in the monasteries of Egypt and Syria for virgins and widows who have vowed themselves to God and have renounced the world and have trodden under foot its pleasures, to ask the mothers of their communities to cut their hair; not that afterwards they go about with heads uncovered in defiance of the apostles command" [1 Corinthians 11:5]."
    Augustine (354-430 a.d.)
    Augustine, post-apostolic theologian prior to the Reformation, quotes 1 Corinthians 11:4,7 with regard to men as follows:
    "'Every man praying or prophesying with veiled head shameth his head;' and, 'A man ought not to veil his head, forsomuch as he is the image and glory of God.'"Now if it is true of a man that he is not to veil his head, then the opposite is true of a woman, that she is to veil her head. "We ought not therefore so to understand that made in the image of the Supreme Trinity, that is, in the image of God, as that same image should be understood to be in three human beings; especially when the apostle says that the man is the image of God, and on that account removes the covering from his head, which he warns the woman to use, speaking thus: 'For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of the man.'" Augustine - (Cited in Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers, Schaff, ed. vol. 3, 523):
    "...especially when the Apostle says that the man is the image of God, and on that account, removes the covering from his head, which he warns the woman to use, speaking thus..." (quoting 1 Cor. 11:7.)
    AD 800
    "It is likely that headgear for women was becoming more common by the seventh century. It seems that Christian morality (based on St Paul's edicts) was influential in this respect. By the eighth century it seems that headcoverings were worn by all women. It seems that a close fitting cap was worn by most women (perhaps similar to the slightly later caps from York and Dublin), which sometimes left the hair at the forehead and temples visible." (Angelcynn, Clothing and Appearance of the Early Christian Anglo-Saxons (c. 600-800 A.D.)
    AD 1100-1200
    "In the 11th and 12th c. it is very unusual to see a man wearing a hat, though the women, unless they are very young or representing some virtue, inevitably have some sort of headdress on…while most women wore something that was more or less a derivative of a veil." (sclark@epas.utoroto.ca SusanCarroll-Clark)
    "Married women usually wore their hair gathered up into a knot at the back of the head, or coiled atop their head in some arrangement and often covered their hair with a cap, veil (hustrulinet) or headdress. Several sources indicate that it was mandatory that Norse women who were married wear a headcovering, however the actual archaeology doesn't seem to support this belief: "Many of the ninth and tenth century women's burials at Birka reveal no headcoverings at all, let alone graves in some other locations, although finds of headwear are more common in Christianized areas like Dublin and Jorvík" (Carolyn Priest-Dorman, Mistress Thora Sharptooth, OL, Viking Women's Garb in Art and Archaeology)
    "…I have looked at dozens and hundreds of illuminations, pictures and medieval artifacts that portray people in the civilian dress of various periods and my observation is that you can't generalize. All through the Early Christian, Migration and Carolingian Eras you don't see many people with hats on, although you see an occasional crown, the women are inevitably veiled and many of the soldiers are wearing helmets."
    John Knox (1505-1572)
    "First, I say, the woman in her greatest perfection was made to serve and obey man, not to rule and command him. As saint Paule doth reason in these wordes: 'Man is not of the woman, but the woman of the man. And man was created for the cause of the woman, but the woman for the cause of man; and therfore oght the woman to have a power upon her head,' (that is, a coverture in signe of subjection)."
    John Knox, First Blast of the Trumpet Against the Monstrous [i.e., against nature] Regiment [i.e., governing authority] of Women, in Works of John Knox, David Lang, ed. vol. 4, p 377: "...and therefore ought the woman to have a power on her head, that is, a coverture in signe of subjection."
    And again (p. 392): "Even so, (saith he) oght man and woman to appeare before God, bearing the ensigns of the condition whiche they have received of him. Man... oght he to appear before his high Majestie bearing the signe of his honour, havinge no coverature upon his heade...Beware Chrysostom what thou saist! thou shalt be reputed a traytor if Englishe men heare thee... He procedeth in these wordes, "But woman oght to be covered, to witnesse that in the earth, she had a head, that is man. Trewe it is, Chrysostom, woman is covered in both realmes, but it is not with a signe of subjection, but it is with the signe of superioritie, to witte, with the royal crowne." (Lest it bears saying, his "warning" to Chrysostom was sarcastic. In context, Knox agrees with Chrysostom and is quoting him against the Royalists.)
    John Calvin (1509-1564)
    The theologian of the Reformation preached three sermons from 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 from which the following excerpts are taken.
    John Calvin (cited in Men, Women, and Order in the Church: 3 Sermons by John Calvin, by Seth Skolnitzky. Presbyterian Heritage Pub.):
    "So if women are thus permitted to have their heads uncovered and to show their hair, they will eventually be allowed to expose their entire breasts, and they will come to make their exhibitions as if it were a tavern show; they will become so brazen that modesty and shame will be no more; in short they will forget the duty of nature….So, when it is permissible for the women to uncover their heads, one will say, 'Well, what harm in uncovering the stomach also?' And then after that one will plead [for] something else: 'Now if the women go bareheaded, why not also [bare] this and [bare] that?' Then the men, for their part, will break loose too. In short, there will be no decency left, unless people contain themselves and respect what is proper and fitting, so as not to go headlong overboard."
    "Hence we infer that the woman has her hair given her for a covering. Should any one now object, that her hair is enough, as being a natural covering, Paul says that it is not, for it is such a covering as requires another thing to be made use of for covering it. And hence a conjecture is drawn, with some appearance of probability — that women who had beautiful hair were accustomed to uncover their heads for the purpose of showing off their beauty. It is not…" (John Calvin's Commentary on Head Coverings)
    George Gillespie (1613-1648)
    Gillespie, the youngest commissioners at the Westminster Assembly, addresses the issue of women speaking as a voice of one in the public worship services of the church when he says:
    "But where find we that women who were prophetesses, and immediately inspired, were allowed to deliver their prophecy in the church? I suppose he had a respect to 1 Cor. xi:5, 'But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered, dishonoreth her head,' which is meant of the public assembly, for the Apostle is speaking of covering or uncovering the head in the church. . . . So that the Geneva annotation upon ver. 5, gives a good sense of that text, 'That women which show themselves in public and ecclesiastical assemblies, without the sign and token of their subjection, that is to say, uncovered, shame themselves.'"
    A Group of Presbyterian Ministers from London during the time of the Westminster Assembly (1646)
    "The wife must have power (exousia) on her head, i.e., a veil is token of her husband's power over her (1 Cor. 11:10) …."
    "Yet a word to the Female Sex only, who come into the Assembly with their hair the most part uncovered, short to shorn, to the shame of their Natures as afore-shew'd: as they may read [Num.5.18.], that that Woman that had her hair uncovered before the Lord, in the Assembly or Worship of God, were only such Women that their Husbands accused them for being dishonest, so were tried by the Law for Jealousie. Mr. Ains. in his Annotations on the words, Uncover the Woman's head, note what the manner was, as the Hebrews write, that the Priest uncovered the Woman's hair, and untied the locks of her head to make her unseemly; hence saith the Apostle, Is it comely for a woman to pray unto God with her head, to wit, her hair, uncovered [I Cor.11.13.]? ...the name Vail, saith Mr. Ainsworth, on Song 5.7. hath its name in the original of spreading, as being spread over her head to cover her: such Vails were worn by Women, partly for ornament, as appeareth by Isai. 3.23. partly for modesty, and in sign of subjection to Men, especially their husbands, I Cor. 11.6,7,10." (Thomas Wall - To Defend the Head from the Superfluity of Naughtiness,1688)
    Henry Alford (1810-1871)
    "[1 Corinthians 11] 2-16. The law of subjection of the woman to the man (2-12), and natural decency itself (13-16), teach that women should be veiled in public religious assemblies."
    Frederick Godet (1812-1900)
    "The phrase [in 1 Corinthians 11:4], "'having down from the head,' that is to say, wearing a kerchief in the form of a veil coming down from the head over the shoulders. And since the woman does not naturally belong to public life, if it happen that in the spiritual domain she has to exercise a function which brings her into prominence, she ought to strive the more to put herself out of view by covering herself with the veil, which declares the dependence in which she remains relatively to her husband."
    In the 1830s Women kept their heads modestly covered most of the time. They wore "day caps" of fine linen or cotton, with ruffles around the face, and chin ties. These were even worn under the cape hood, or under the summer straw bonnet or winter quilted bonnet. Ladies of fashion wore elaborately decorated bonnets when they left home: flowers, feathers, lace, ribbons, ruchings and ruffles abounded.
    A. R. Fausset (1821-1910)
    Fausset co-authored with David Brown and Robert Jamieson the work, A Commentary, Critical, Experimental, and Practical on the Old and New Testaments.
    "In putting away the veil, she puts away the badge of her subjection to man (which is her true 'honor'), and of her connection with Christ, man's Head. Moreover, the head covering was the emblem of maiden modesty before man (Gen. xxiv: 65), and chastity (Gen. xx: 16). By its unlawful excitement in assemblies is avoided, women not attracting attention. Scripture sanctions not the emancipation of woman from subjection: modesty is her true ornament."
    "It hath a threefold use, For decoration, as in Isa. iii. 23. 2. For a sign of modesty, pleaded for by the apostle, 1 Cor. xi. 6. 3. And mainly a sign of women's subjection to their own husbands..." (Banner of Truth reprint of 1840 edition; originally published posthumously in 1668. p 280. James Durham - Commentary on the Song of Solomon:Though Durham puts emphasis on it as a sign for wives, he notes the second use as a sign of modesty, which would be applicable to all Christian ladies.)
    M. R. Vincent (His Word Studies in the New Testament was published in 1886)
    "The head-dress of Greek women consisted of nets, hair-bags, or kerchiefs, sometimes covering the whole head. A shawl which enveloped the body was also often thrown over the head, especially at marriages or funerals. This costume the Corinthian women had disused in the Christian assemblies, perhaps as an assertion of the abolition of sexual distinctions, and the spiritual equality of the woman with the man in the presence of Christ. This custom was discountenanced by Paul as striking at the divinely ordained subjection of the woman to the man."
    G. G. Findlay (no specific date cited for his work on 1 Corinthians in The Expositor's Greek New Testament, but it was written in the late 19th century)
    "For a woman to discard the veil means to cast off masculine authority, which is a fixed part of the Divine order, like man's subordination to Christ (3 f.)."
    A. T. Robertson (His Word Pictures in the New Testament was published in 1931)
    In commenting on 1 Corinthians 11:4 ("having his head covered"), he points out:
    "Literally, having a veil (kalumma understood) down from the head." Paul declares in 1 Corinthians 11:6, "Let her be veiled. . . . Let her cover up herself with the veil (down, kata, the Greek says, the veil hanging down from the head)."
    William Barclay, 1954
    "The problem was whether or not in the Christian Church a woman had the right to take part in the service unveiled. Paul's answer was bluntly this the veil is always a sign of subjection; it is worn by an inferior in the presence of a superior; now woman is inferior to man, in the sense that man is head of the household; therefore it is wrong for a man to appear at public worship veiled and it is equally wrong for a woman to appear unveiled."
    John Murray (1898-1975) was Professor of Systematic Theology at Westminster Theological Seminary
    These excerpts are taken from a letter to the Evangelical Presbyterian Church (Australia) concerning the matter of women being veiled in worship.
    "Since Paul appeals to the order of creation (Vss. 3b, vss 7ff), it is totally indefensible to suppose that what is in view and enjoined had only local or temporary relevance. The ordinance of creation is universally and perpetually applicable, as also are the implications for conduct arising therefrom."
    "I am convinced that a head covering is definitely in view forbidden for the man (Vss 4 & 7) and enjoined for the woman (Vss 5,6,15). In the case of the woman the covering is not simply her long hair. This supposition would make nonsense of verse 6. For the thought there is, that if she does not have a covering she might as well be shorn or shaven, a supposition without any force whatever if the hair covering is deemed sufficient."
    In 1970, Pope Paul VI promulgated the Roman Missal, ignoring mention of women’s veils. But at the time the missal was published, it didn’t seem necessary to keep mandatory such an obvious and universal practice, even if it no longer had a "normative" value (Inter insigniores, # 4). (THE VEIL Derived from a book in progress called: "The Unveiled Woman" by Jackie Freppon.)
    J. Vernon McGee (1904-1990)
    "Apparently some of the women in the church at Corinth were saying, 'All things are lawful for me, therefore, I won't cover my head.' Paul says this should not be done because the veil is a mark of subjection."
    Charles Caldwell Ryrie (The Role of Women in the Church was published in 1958)
    "If angels desire to look into things pertaining to salvation, then they should see as they look at veiled women in the assembly of Christians the voluntary submission of a woman to her head. Thus the early church (for this was the custom of the churches generally) while offering religious equality in spiritual privilege insisted on showing in public worship the principle of subordination of women by their being veiled."
    Albrect Oepke (A contributor to the highly acclaimed Theological Dictionary of the New Testament which was published in 1965)
    "The veiling of women is a custom in Israel. A disgraced woman comes veiled to judgment (katakekalummene, Sus.32). Yet one may suspect that a woman muffled up (katekalupsato to prosopon) and lurking by the wayside is a harlot (Gn. 38:15). This opens the way for an understanding of the relevant NT passage. The veiling of women in the NT and the contemporary world."
    During the second Vatican Council, a mob of reporters waited for news after a council meeting. One of them asked Msgr. Annibale Bugnini, then secretary of the Vatican Congregation for Divine Worship, if women still had to wear a headcover in the churches. His response was that the Bishops were considering other issues, and that women’s veils were not on the agenda. The next day, the international press announced throughout the world that women did not have to wear the veil anymore. A few days later, Msgr. Bugnini told the press he was misquoted and women must still had to wear the veil. But the Press did not retract the error, and many women stopped wearing the veil as out of confusion and because of pressure from feminist groups.
    Robert H. Gundry (A Survey of the New Testament was published in 1970)
    "Paul's instructions concerning the veiling of women also demand knowledge of prevailing ancient customs. It was proper in the Roman Empire for a respectable woman to veil herself in public.
    Bruce Waltke ("1 Corinthians 1:2-16:An Interpretation" was published in Bibliotheca Sacra in 1978)
    "Although Paul does not use the word veil [kalumma GLP], it seems reasonable to suppose that he has this article of apparel in view. . . .To appear at the public assembly, then, with inappropriate headdress would disgrace one's head."
    Before the revision in 1983, Canon law had stated that women must cover their heads "...especially when they approach the holy table" (can.1262.2). But in order to reduce such a growing collection of books, the new version of Canon law was subjected to concise changes. In the process, mention of head coverings was omitted.
    Noel Weeks (The Sufficiency of Scripture was published in 1988)
    "There is something ludicrous about being the head or authority while one at the same time hides one's physical head. It follows therefore that praying and prophesying are authoritative functions which call for an unveiled head, unshrouded head. Hence any woman engaging in those activities must also be bare-headed. Consequently Paul turns to what such unveiling must mean for the woman. In contrast to the man, when she prays or prophesies, the unveiling of her head must be dishonorable to her. What does it mean for a woman to be bare-headed? As Paul says, it is equivalent to being shaved or having her hair shorn off. That of course is dishonoring for a woman. Hence she should not uncover her head."
    Robert D. Culver (Contributed "A Traditional View" to Women in Ministry Four Views which was published in 1989)
    "God distinguishes sharply between the sexes as to appearance and activity in formal Christian assemblies. A man's hair is to be short and his head uncovered by hat or shawl, while a woman's hair is to be uncut and, in visible recognition of submission to God's order, she is to wear an additional head covering in order to veil, not her face, but head."
    AD 2000
    "Women are not required to wear a head covering, except when up on the bimah [the 'stage'' in front of the sanctuary]. However, women should feel free to cover their heads at other times. Any hat (including a kippah) will do just fine as a head covering; feel free to wear a fashionable hat." (Beth El Temple Center, AD 2000)
    "Orthodox women, according to the words of the holy Apostle Paul, go to God's church with covered heads. For nearly two thousand years now, this custom has been kept by faithful women and has been handed down from generation to generation. It is a custom not only of the local churches, but also of the Universal Church, and, therefore ­ whether we be in a Greek, in a Serbian or Russian church ­ the women in the church have their heads covered." (The Russian Orthodox Cathedral of St. John the Baptist, Washington, D.C.)


    لتحميل كتبي فضلاً الضغط على الصورة التالية - متجدد بإذن الله

    نقره لتكبير أو تصغير الصورة ونقرتين لعرض الصورة في صفحة مستقلة بحجمها الطبيعي



  6. #116
    تاريخ التسجيل
    Sep 2006
    المشاركات
    1,550
    الدين
    الإسلام
    آخر نشاط
    22-03-2017
    على الساعة
    08:38 AM

    افتراضي








    Part III
    What others say
    "We should, even in our dress and habit, avoid every thing that may dishonor Christ. The woman was made subject to man, because made for his help and comfort. And she should do nothing, in Christian assemblies, which looked like a claim of being equal. She ought to have "power," that is, a veil, on her head, because of the angels. Their presence should keep Christians from all that is wrong while in the worship of God…It was the common usage of the churches, for women to appear in public assemblies, and join in public worship, veiled; and it was right that they should do so. The Christian religion sanctions national customs wherever these are not against the great principles of truth and holiness; affected singularities receive no countenance from any thing in the Bible." (MATTHEW HENRY’S CONCISE COMMENTARY)
    "Every man praying or prophesying — Speaking by the immediate power of God, With his head and face covered either with a veil or with long hair dishonoreth his head. St. Paul seems to mean, as in these eastern nations veiling the head is a badge of subjection, so a man who prays or prophesies with a veil on his head, reflects a dishonor on Christ, whose representative he is.
    But every woman — Who, under an immediate impulse of the Spirit, (for then only was a woman suffered to speak in the church,) prays or prophesies without a veil on her face, as it were disclaims subjection, and reflects dishonor on man, her head. For it is the same, in effect, as if she cut her hair short, and wore it in the distinguishing form of the men. In those ages, men wore their hair exceeding short, as appears from the ancient statues and pictures.
    Therefore if a woman is not covered — If she will throw off the badge of subjection, let her appear with her hair cut like a man’s. But if it be shameful far a woman to appear thus in public, especially in a religious assembly, let her, for the same reason, keep on her veil.
    A man indeed ought not to veil his head, because he is the image of God — In the dominion he bears over the creation, representing the supreme dominion of God, which is his glory. But the woman is only matter of glory to the man, who has a becoming dominion over her. Therefore she ought not to appear, but with her head veiled, as a tacit acknowledgment of it.
    The man is not — In the first production of nature. For this cause also a woman ought to be veiled in the public assemblies, because of the angels — Who attend there, and before whom they should be careful not to do anything indecent or irregular." (JOHN WESLEY’S COMMENTARY ON 1 CORINTHIANS)
    "Having corrected the more private abuses which prevailed among the Corinthians, the apostle begins in this chapter to consider those which relate to the mode of conducting public worship. The first of these is the habit of women appearing in public without a veil. The veil in all eastern countries was, and to a great extent still is, the symbol of modesty and subjection. For a woman, therefore, in Corinth to discard the veil was to renounce her claim to modesty, and to refuse to recognize her subordination to her husband. The other was more in the fashion of the common eastern veil, which covered the face, with the exception of the eyes. In one form or other, the custom was universal for all respectable women to appear veiled in public. — The apostle therefore says, that a woman who speaks in public with her head uncovered, dishonoreth her head." (CHARLES HODGE’S COMMENTARY ON 1 CORINTHIANS)
    "Unveiled: without the peplum or shawl, which Greek women wore usually on their shoulders, but in public over their heads. Now when men stand uncovered before God, and women covered, they accept formally and visibly by their own action this distinction of sex and the position in reference to the other sex which God has given." (JOSEPH BEET’S COMMENTARY ON 1 CORTINTIANS 11)
    "The Puritan and Pilgrim women all wore one while working. Even later, the pioneers in the westward expansion were still wearing bonnets, both indoors and out. Pictures on the walls of the Roman catacombs show the early Christian women wearing one; the Samaritan woman was shown without one. Some old Bibles contain pictures replete with women in veils. The Samaritan woman
    We know from early church history that the woman's headcovering became the norm in Antioch, Rome, and Africa. The apostle Thomas took the practice of wearing the headcovering to India and the Christian women have been wearing the veil there ever since. The practice continues to appear with many of the Chinese, Asian, African, and Eastern European Christians. Women there wear one today just by learning from the Scriptures, without any explanation to the contrary.
    In more recent history, there appears the Salvation Army bonnet in the 1700s and coverings amongst the early Methodists. Susanna Wesley wore one. Currently, the wife of Richard Wurmbrand (founder of The Voice of the Martyrs) wears one, as do many others.
    Why do brides wear a wedding veil? Is it not a vestigial remnant from an earlier practice? From where does the nurse’s cap come? And, of course, the nun’s black veil? Charles Finney said of any devout Christian practice, "You will appear eccentric. Your obedience will challenge others."
    Consider this from the early Church, who taught that "God is pleased to bless and answer the petitions of the women who takes her place in His divine order"
    "It cannot be unequivocally asserted, but the preponderance of evidence points toward the public head covering of women as a universal custom in the first century in both Jewish culture and Greco-Roman culture. The head covering itself seems to have been a part of the outer garment drawn up over the head of the woman like a hood; it may also have been a shawl covering just the hair, and in some places, an actual face veil. Evidently, however, some women in the Corinthian church began to avoid wearing the customary head covering, not only in public, but also in the church meetings. Apparently, what was taking place was that some women, in expressing their liberation, even Christian liberty, were rejecting subordination and with it the visible symbol of that subordination, the head covering."
    "It seems that it was the loose women, the prostitutes and the like, who did not wear such a covering. Women's hair was a prime object of male lust in the ancient Mediterranean world. Societies which employed head coverings thus viewed uncovered married women as unfaithful to their husbands, that is, seeking another man (virgins and prostitutes, conversely, were expected not to cover their heads, since they were looking for men)."
    Pro
    "A Canadian-born Muslim woman has taken to wearing the traditional hijab scarf. It tends to make people see her as either a terrorist or a symbol of oppressed womanhood, but she finds the experience liberating." (Naheed Mustafa, A Muslim)
    The answer to the question is very simple - Muslim women observe HIJAB (covering the head and the body) because Allah has told them to do so. 'O Prophet, tell your wives and daughters and the believing women to draw their outer garments around them (when they go out or are among men). That is better in order that they may be known (to be Muslims) and not annoyed...' (Qur'an 33:59)."
    What a shame even the cult of Islam is devoted to their god to obey without question! emphasis mine.
    "Unless a woman has truly yielded to the submission of God's governmental plan, she should not wear headcovering. To do so would be hypocritical. It is to be symbolic of her willingness to bend her knee in submission and obedience to God's Word and His ordained governmental system. Wearing headcovering doesn't in any way make one more spiritual. Some who wear it, however, would say this step in obedience has resulted in a magnification of their sense of God's love and peace, and that since wearing it, they have noticed significant increase in spiritual strength, stability, and growth." (Karen McDaniel)
    "Some excuse their uncovered heads by citing verse 15, 'Her hair is given her for a covering.' Since she has hair, these assert, that is enough. Surely a careful reading of the text would show such an interpretation to be a weak avoidance of the truth as it is set out. Notice that for the woman there are two glories involved. She is a glory: "The woman is the glory of the man" (v. 7). But she also has a glory of her own. Her hair is a glory to her (verse 15). For the glory that she is (the glory of the man), God has given her a natural covering, her long hair. For the glory that she has (her hair), she must submit her will to cover that with another covering which she places over her own glory." (J. Boyd Nicholson, Sr.)
    "Now some try and argue that the head covering women ought to have on their head which is spoken about in verses 4-13 is answered by a 'covering' of long hair in verses 14-15. In other words, Paul simply says that women ought to have long hair and not cut it short. This is appealing to Christian women in the United States where head coverings are not in fashion in the pagan culture. Sadly, it seems many Christian women desire to fit the culture's mold of what is physically "beautiful". Being bombarded with the magazine covers at the checkout line at the supermarket has taken its toll. Oh that Christian ladies could clearly see that those women on the magazine covers are nothing more than a parade of prostitutes. It might also be appealing since women were raised without headcoverings, so it would take some getting used to physically." (http://www.john14-6.org/Women.html#XII. What About Head Coverings?)
    Con
    "Thus, since this was a custom which was in the Greek culture, it has no bearing on us today in America, as we have no such custom. Our custom has been that when a male enters a house (residence) or a house of worship that he removes his hat or head covering. May we continue this, out of respect, just as we "tip" our hat in the presence of a female. No, God does not demand that American women wear a head covering in a house of worship anymore than He does for us, as worshippers, to wash one another's feet (that is another article), or to greet one another with a holy kiss."
    "Recent teachings have gone forth that say a woman must be under a male's headship, or "covering," to be able to minister for the Lord. This has even been applied to women who are unmarried. These false teachings dictate they must be under the male leadership of some church if they are to speak or minister. This is far from the true teaching of God's Word. In the Old Testament…(Please note here, that I am not advocating that women refuse to be a part of a local church, but rather saying she may be the leader of a local church.)" (Betty Miller, http://www.bible.com/answers/acoverin.html)
    "In other words, early Christian women apparently either wore veils at all times while in public (which they admitted was a tradition, not a Biblical teaching), or only while praying or teaching (as the Bible is teaching in 1 Corinthians 11). Apparently they were not compelled to leave their long hair uncut, provided it remained long." (http://www.bibledoctrines.com/html/hairveil.htm)
    "Also, while wearing head coverings no longer speaks to our culture, there is an abiding principle in this text that is applicable to the twentieth century…We cannot treat this complex question in detail, but the two most probable suggestions can be set forth: (1) The custom Paul recommends is for women to wear shawls. (2) Paul objects to long, loose hair that falls down the back; he wants women to follow the usual custom of piling their hair up on top of their heads. The problem with the Corinthian women, then, is that they were wearing their hair loose and flowing down their backs." (Thomas R. Schreiner) This person has some ambiguous conclusions about the truth of the text, emphasis mine.
    "Now I don't want to be unkind, but in my opinion a person must be totally brainwashed to read this text and in all sincerity and earnestness conclude it says what Shepherdship proponents and adherents assert it says. Indeed, this text has been used as a premise for a number of pretty silly and bizarre notions, ranging from the role of women in the church all the way to the assertion that God is saying here that women are supposed to wear little doilies on their heads when they attend church. The second primary conceptual error on which the heretical Discipleship/Shepherdship doctrines are established, is the matter of "spiritual covering." Indeed, so-called "spiritual covering" is the very centerpiece of these wholly unBiblical teachings and the hyper-authoritarianism they engender."
    "Let me begin by speaking plainly and directly: "spiritual covering" as theorized by the Discipleship theosophy is an absolute myth. No semblance of the Discipleship teaching version of "spiritual covering" exists anywhere within the pages of Scripture. "Spiritual covering," in the vein it is presented by proponents of these hyper-authoritarian teachings, is an outright deception! It is a complete fabrication concocted by the originators of these fallacious doctrines as a supposed pretext for facilitation of purely self-aggrandizing objectives of subjugation, domination, and control." (Steven Lambert, ThD)
    "On the evening of 16 November 1986 whilst reading the eleventh chapter of Paul's first letter to the Corinthians, I was overcome by the Spirit and began to understand the true meaning of what the apostle had written. In reading the first sixteen verses I reflected on what I had been taught in the churches, viz. that the practice of women covering their heads during public worship was a local custom and not applic- able to our day." (The Olive Branch,http://www.nccg.org/006.html)
    "…the wearing of a veil by a Christian woman is unnecessary, as that is not a valid symbol of submission in our culture. And the wearing of a hat is even more unneccessary, as the womanly wearing of hats is often a sign of predatory aggression rather than submission in the Western world — especially the fruited variety which appears on high days and holy days!!! Fortunately, a woman's hair has been given to her as a covering -- a glory to her, in fact -- and it will act as a sign of her womanly submission, so she doesn't need to feel intimidated into wearing any kind of hat by another Christian." (Alan Morrison)
    "It is proper for a woman to have a symbol of authority upon her head; what that symbol consists of does not matter, but the necessity of the symbol remains fixed even as the authority of man remains fixed. The woman's covering is called "power," but it is a symbol of another's authority, not her own, just as the references to glory in verses 7 and 15 speak of the subjection to another's authority." (Tabletalk, June 21, 1996).

    لتحميل كتبي فضلاً الضغط على الصورة التالية - متجدد بإذن الله

    نقره لتكبير أو تصغير الصورة ونقرتين لعرض الصورة في صفحة مستقلة بحجمها الطبيعي



  7. #117
    تاريخ التسجيل
    Sep 2006
    المشاركات
    1,550
    الدين
    الإسلام
    آخر نشاط
    22-03-2017
    على الساعة
    08:38 AM

    افتراضي




    Part IV
    History
    French held in 586 AD conference to discuss: Is the man or women is a human being? !
    Does it have the spirit or do not have the spirit? And if they have the spirit of Will is the spirit of the animal or the human spirit?
    If the human spirit that is it at the level of the spirit of the man or lower them?
    And finally decided it was human, but created to serve men only. The women at the birth of church says Dahen Atalmn Come help of the Lord to take revenge on them.
    The English Parliament passed a resolution in the era of Henry VIII of England women are forbidden to read the book (New Testament); because they are considered impure.
    In England, a royal order was issued by Henry VIII prohibits women from reading the Bible, women did not have until 1882 the right to own property.
    The woman's personality in England obscured her personality is not released this stone but by the year 1870, then a law was passed in 1883 on behalf of and under the ownership of married raise from this stone.
    In Italy, took out a law passed in 1919 women of number interdicted.
    In Germany and Switzerland amended laws passed in the early twentieth century stone bases on women, and became a wife like her husband's rights.
    In the fifth century Christian consensus that women are devoid of soul survivor of the torments of hell except the mother of Jesus, and asked Are women human being or not a human being? .
    And on the ruins of Christian civilization came material civilization to fully reversible where Christianity was considered monastic celibacy and repression symbol of HH rights; That came condition decomposition, debauched, and communal sexual reaction to what she did the church, Voaidt women to life of the jungle, and have become a commodity and commercial publicity attached to her image vulgar merchandise, to be a symbol of commercial propaganda.
    (It is important here to decide headstrong perception of women after the coup Europe from the yoke of the church, and perceptions of the church, and its evils - during this - for God, and his approach to life, and the separation of sexual pleasure in gender relations, and goals of humanity, then goals animal) ..
    And thus unleashed the so-called women's liberation; to destroy all moral values ​​and innate, and the disintegration of the bonds family links (and liberated women ... and liberate people from the constraints of religion, ethics, and traditions, and become pornography religion recognized, facilitated by the state, and carried out by, and licensed Bmzaweltha in each place ... and recruit - under heard her sight - all the forces to call them, books, research, and stories, and the press, radio, cinema, and television.
    Says "Will Durant" in his book "The Pleasures of Philosophy:" We face again the problem that worry Pal Socrates. We mean how guided to replace natural ethics balances upper champion impact on people's behavior? We squander our social heritage of this corruption immoral ...) [c 1 / r 6]
    He says his book (America that I saw): (she said to me one girls American Institute of Teachers (Greeley Colorado) during a debate on the social life in America: The question of sexual relations issue biological purely, and you - Weavers - think this issue is simple to enter the element of moral , Persian Valhassan, and bull and cow, ram and ewe, parents and BASS ... I do not think one of them in this morality tale, which is engaged in sexual contact, so go easy simple comfortable life!!!) ..
    Not satisfied with all this degradation, but over what is the most terrible and heinous, They began same-sex marriage on the eyes and ears of the whole world, and passed by the British Parliament.
    This is the nature of Western thought in the relationship with the woman relationship animal is not, say, "Will Durant:" (and what their marriage was not a marriage in the true sense - because it linked a sexual bond paternity - it corrupts for losing the basis for, and the necessities of life. Die this marriage for separation from life, and kind, and shrinks the couple themselves alone if they were pieces separate. and ending heterosexual in love to individual sends pressure life Purim, and return to man his desire natural diversification while lead familiarity to cynicism, it is not a woman's new effort than put forth) [men and women in modern society.
    Practical Application:Those called out, elected, Godly, remnant, saints of God, Christian women should wear a head covering while praying or prophesying (reading or speaking God's word the Bible) and while coming together as the Church (called out ones) in fellowship. It is a matter of proper order and submission. The submissive woman who knows her place (which modern day culture in America seeks to remove) and happily wears the head covering because it is a reminder of her subjection to her husband, and men in the body of Christ, and ultimately her God.
    1- Common opinion concerning chapter divisions attributes them to Cardinal Hugo of Saint Cher for use in his concordance to the Latin Vulgate (c. 1240, first printed, with modification, at Bologna, 1479). This opinion rests on the direct testimony of Gilbert Genebrard (d. 1597), that "the scholastics who with Cardinal Hugo were authors of the concordance" made the division...The better opinion is, that Stephen Langton, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 1228), made the chapter division to facilitate citation. Before the invention of printing it had already passed from Latin manuscripts to those of other tongues, and after the invention of printing it became general. It has undergone slight variations from the beginning to the present day. Many early printed Bibles, especially Greek Testaments, besides these chapters retain also the old breves or titloi noted in the margin. (see above, II, 1, § 5). The chapters were at first subdivided into seven portions (not paragraphs), marked in the margin by the letters A, B, C, D, E, F, G, reference being made by the chapter number and the letter under which the passage occurred. The first portion of the Bible printed with the Masoretic verses numbered was the Psalterium Quincuplex of Faber Stapulensis, printed at Paris by Henry Stephens in 1509. In 1528 Sanctes Pagninus published at Lyons a new Latin version of the whole Bible with the Masoretic verses marked and numbered. He also divided the Apocrypha and New Testament into numbered verses; but these were three or four times as long as the present ones. The present New Testament verses were introduced by Robert Stephens in his Greco-Latin Testament of 1551 (see above, II, 2, § 2). Stephens says in his preface that the division is made to follow the most ancient Greek and Latin copies.
    Veiling








    For 2,000 years, Catholic women have veiled themselves before entering a church or any time they are in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament (e.g., during
    sick calls). It was written into the 1917 Code of Canon Law, Canon 1262, that women must cover their heads -- "especially when they approach the holy table" ("mulieres autem, capite cooperto et modeste vestitae, maxime cum ad mensam Dominicam accedunt") -- but during the Second Vatican Council, Bugnini (the same Freemason who designed the Novus Ordo Mass) was asked by journalists if women would still have to cover their heads. His reply, perhaps innocently enough, was that the issue was not being discussed. The journalists (as journalists are wont to do with Church teaching) took his answer as a "no," and printed their misinformation in newspapers all over the world. 1 Since then, many, if not most, Catholic women have lost the tradition.

    After so many years of many women forgetting or positively repudiating the veil, clerics, not wanting to be confrontational or upset radical feminists, pretended the issue didn't exist. When the 1983 Code of Canon Law was produced, veiling was simply not mentioned (not abrogated, mind you, but simply not mentioned). However, Canons 20-21 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law make clear that later Canon Law abrogates earlier Canon Law only when this is made explicit and that, in cases of doubt, the revocation of earlier law is not to be presumed; quite the opposite:

    Canon 20 A later law abrogates or derogates from an earlier law, if it expressly so states, or if it is directly contrary to that law, or if it integrally reorders the whole subject matter of the earlier law. A universal law, however, does not derogate from a particular or from a special law, unless the law expressly provides otherwise.

    Canon 21 In doubt, the revocation of a previous law is not presumed; rather, later laws are to be related to earlier ones and, as far as possible, harmonized with them.
    Canons 27 and 28 add to the argument:
    Canon 27 Custom is the best interpreter of laws.

    Canon 28 Without prejudice to the provisions of can. 5, a custom, whether contrary to or apart from the law, is revoked by a contrary custom or law. But unless the law makes express mention of them, it does not revoke centennial or immemorial customs, nor does a universal law revoke particular customs.
    2
    Christian veiling is a very serious matter, one that concerns two millennia of Church Tradition -- whch extends back to Old Testament tradition and to New Testament admonitions. St. Paul wrote.
    1 Corinthians 11:1-17:
    Be ye followers of me, as I also am of Christ. Now I praise you, brethren, that in all things you are mindful of me and keep my ordinances as I have delivered them to you. But I would have you know that the head of every man is Christ: and the head of the woman is the man: and the head of Christ is God. Every man praying or prophesying with his head covered disgraceth his head. But every woman praying or prophesying with her head not covered disgraceth her head: for it is all one as if she were shaven. For if a woman be not covered, let her be shorn. But if it be a shame to a woman to be shorn or made bald, let her cover her head. The man indeed ought not to cover his head: because he is the image and glory of God. But the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man [c.f. Genesis 2-3]. For the man was not created for the woman: but the woman for the man. Therefore ought the woman to have a power over her head, because of the angels. But yet neither is the man without the woman, nor the woman without the man, in the Lord. For as the woman is of the man, so also is the man by the woman: but all things of God. You yourselves judge. Doth it become a woman to pray unto God uncovered? Doth not even nature itself teach you that a man indeed, if he nourish his hair, it is a shame unto him? But if a woman nourish her hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her for a covering. But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor the Church of God [i.e., if anyone want to complain about this, we have no other way of doing things, this is our practice; all the churches believe the same way]. Now this I ordain: not praising you, that you come together, not for the better, but for the worse.
    According to St. Paul, we women veil ourselves as a sign that His glory, not ours, should be the focus at worship, and as a sign of our submission to authority. It is an outward sign of our recognizing headship, both of God and our husbands (or fathers, as the case may be), and a sign of our respecting the presence of the Holy Angels at the Divine Liturgy. In veiling, we reflect the divine invisible order and make it visible. This St. Paul presents clearly as an ordinance, one that is the practice of all the churches.

    Some women, influenced by the thoughts of "Christian" feminists, believe that St. Paul was speaking as a man of his time, and that this ordinance no longer applies. They use the same arguments that homosexualists make in trying to prove their case. In this quote, homosexualist Rollan McCleary, who believes that Jesus was "gay," tries to show that Paul's admonitions against homosexuality were culturally
    conditioned:
    In the New Testament, the Apostle Paul writes about "men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due" (Romans 1:27).

    Asked about these texts, McCleary said references in the Scriptures to homosexuality were misunderstood or taken out of context.

    "In those days they didn't have kind of concept of homosexuality as an identity such as we have it," he argued. "It has much more to do with other factors in society ... homosexuality was associated with idolatrous practices."

    In the case of Paul's writings, he continued, "does everybody agree with St. Paul on slavery [or] on women wearing hats? There is such a thing as historical context."
    Of course we Catholics agree with St. Paul on slavery (St. Paul wasn't talking about chattel slavery, by the way), and on veiling, and on everything else! Please! But the liberal above makes a point: if Christians want to reject veiling, why not reject the other things St. Paul has to say? The traditional Catholic woman has the snappy comeback to the defiant homosexualist: "we do veil ourselves and don't disagree with St. Paul!" But what leg do the uncovered women have to stand on? And what other Scriptural admonitions can they disregard on a whim -- or because of following the bad example of a generation of foolish or misled Catholic women who disregarded them?

    Now, I ask my readers to re-read the Biblical passage about veiling and note well that St. Paul was never intimidated about breaking unnecessary taboos. It was he who emphasized over and over again that circumcision and the entire Mosaic Law were not necessary -- and this as he was speaking to Hebrew Christians! No, the tradition and ordinance of veiling is not a matter of Paul being influenced by his culture; it is a symbol that is as relevant as the priest's cassock and the nun's habit.

    Note, too, that Paul is in no way being "misogynist" here. He assures us that, while woman is made for the glory of the man even as man is made for the glory of God, "yet neither is the man without the woman, nor the woman without the man, in the Lord. For as the woman is of the man, so also is the man by the woman: but all things of God." Men need women, women need men. But we have different roles, each equal in dignity -- and all for the glory of God (and, of course, we are to treat each other absolutely equally in the order of charity!).The veil is a sign of our recognizing these differences in roles.

    The veil, too, is a sign of
    modesty and chastity. In Old Testament times, uncovering a woman's head was seen as a way to humiliate a woman or to punish adultresses and those women who transgressed the Law (e.g.., Numbers 5:12-18, Isaias 3:16-17, Song of Solomon 5:7). A Hebrew woman wouldn't have dreamed of entering the Temple (or later, the synagogue) without covering her head. This practice is simply carried on by the Church (as it is also by Orthodox Christians and even by "Orthodox" women of the post-Temple Jewish religion today).

    That which is Veiled is a Holy Vessel
    Note what Paul says, "But if a woman nourish her hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her for a covering." We don't veil ourselves because of some "primordial" sense of femine shame; we are covering our glory so that He may be glorified instead. We cover ourselves because we are holy -- and because feminine beauty is incredibly powerful. If you don't believe me, consider how the image of "woman" is used to sell everything from shampoo to used cars. We women need to understand the power of the feminine and act accordingly by following the rules of modest attire, including the use of the veil.

    By surrendering our glory to the headship of our husbands and to God, we surrender to them in the same way that the Blessed Virgin surrendered herself to the Holy Ghost ("Be it done to me according to Thy will!"); the veil is a sign as powerful -- and beautiful -- as when a man bends on one knee to ask his girl to marry him.

    Now, think of what else was veiled in the Old Testament -- the Holy of Holies!


    Hebrews 9:1-8
    The former [Old Covenant] indeed had also justifications of divine service and a sanctuary. For there was a tabernacle made the first, wherein were the candlesticks and the table and the setting forth of loaves, which is called the Holy. And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holy of Holies: Having a golden censer and the ark of the testament covered about on every part with gold, in which was a golden pot that had manna and the rod of Aaron that had blossomed and the tables of the testament. And over it were the cherubims of glory overshadowing the propitiatory: of which it is not needful to speak now particularly. Now these things being thus ordered, into the first tabernacle, the priests indeed always entered, accomplishing the offices of sacrifices. But into the second, the high priest alone, once a year: not without blood, which he offereth for his own and the people's ignorance: The Holy Ghost signifying this: That the way into the Holies was not yet made manifest, whilst the former tabernacle was yet standing.
    ...The Ark of the Old Covenant was kept in the veiled Holy of Holies. And at Mass, what is kept veiled until the Offertory? The Chalice -- the vessel that holds the Precious Blood! And, between Masses, what is veiled? The Ciborium in the Tabernacle, the vessel which holds the very Body of Christ. These vessels of life are veiled because they are holy!

    And who is veiled? Who is the All Holy, the Ark of the New Covenant, the Vessel of the True Life? Our Lady -- and by wearing the veil, we imitate her and affirm ourselves as women, as vessels of life.

    This one superficially small act is:

    so rich with symbolism: of submission to authority; of surrender to God; of the imitation of Our Lady as a woman who uttered her "fiat!"; of covering our glory for His glory; of modesty; of chastity, of our being vessels of life like the Chalice, the Ciborium and, most especially, Our Lady;
    an Apostolic ordinance -- with roots deep in the Old Testament -- and, therefore, a matter of intrinsic Tradition;
    the way Catholic women have worshipped for two millennia (i.e., even if it weren't a matter of Sacred Tradition in the intrinsic sense, it is, at the least, a matter of ecclesiastical tradition, which also must be upheld). It is our heritage, a part of Catholic culture;
    pragmatic: it leaves one free to worry less about "bad hair days";
    and for the rebels out there, it is counter-cultural nowadays, you must admit!
    The question I'd like answered is, "Why would any Catholic woman not want to veil herself?"

    Face Veil traditions in Judaism and Christianity
    Some examples of bridal face veils
    King James 2000 Bible
    For she had said unto the servant, What man is this that walks in the field to meet us? And the servant had said, It is my master: therefore she took a veil, and covered herself










    Below: Christian women in prayer

    Catholic nuns from the Missionaries of Charity order sing hymns for a special prayer during the eleventh death anniversary of Mother Teresa in the eastern Indian city of Kolkata September 5, 2008. Mother Teresa was a Nobel Peace Prize-winning nun who died in 1997, and was beatified by Pope John Paul II in 2003 at the Vatican.
    Mother Teresa

    REUTERS/Jayanta Shaw

    The woman's husband went
    In the Middle Ages in Europe, it was the duty of the married woman to wear a cover for the neck and chin now cover the head called wimple
    Photo of some of their own statues









    A denomination of Christian nuns who are completely veiled from head to toe.
    The point is that the face veil is NOT the inventions of the Muslims, but practiced where humans value chastity, and the role of marriage in life .

    A Personal Note:
    I remember a Christian Assembly of God preacher and missionary, Ron Peck, in the mid western USA state of Missouri, in all honesty and pride of this noble tradition, telling me that his grandmother NEVER went to church on any Sunday without a full face veil. This speaks volumes about the religious traditions in the USA in the times when modesty, chastity, and propriety were dominate among the people.

    Pilgrim nuns climb Rome’s Scala Santa (Holy Steps) on their knees.



    Some examples of funeral face veils For instance, who alive at the time of the assassination (conspiracy) of President John F Kennedy, can forget Jackie Kennedy at her husband’s funeral




    لتحميل كتبي فضلاً الضغط على الصورة التالية - متجدد بإذن الله

    نقره لتكبير أو تصغير الصورة ونقرتين لعرض الصورة في صفحة مستقلة بحجمها الطبيعي



  8. #118
    تاريخ التسجيل
    Sep 2006
    المشاركات
    1,550
    الدين
    الإسلام
    آخر نشاط
    22-03-2017
    على الساعة
    08:38 AM

    افتراضي



    Chapter IV


    Part 1



    Muslim headscarves




    Niqab


    Introduction



    A woman in niqab



    Niqab is different from hijab. Hijab refers to covering everything except the hands and face. Niqab is the term used to refer to the piece of cloth which covers the face and women who wear it usually cover their hands also. It is worn by many Muslim women across Saudi Arabia and the Indian subcontinent and is worn by many women in the West.


    Historically, the veiling of the face was practised by many cultures before Islam and scholars say the adoption of its practice by Muslims was part of fitting into the society.


    Although the majority of scholars agree that hijab is obligatory, only a minority of them say that the niqab is.


    The scholars who do say it is obligatory are further divided by exactly what they believe needs to be covered. Some say that the eyes may be left unconcealed, while others say that everything must be concealed.


    However, those scholars who rule that niqab is not an obligation do not necessarily oppose those who choose to wear it.


    The most authentic ruling according to the majority of scholars is that it is not necessary and, unlike hijab, there is no sin if it is not worn. Some of these scholars state that wearing the niqab as an act of extra piety, provided they do not believe it is an obligation, will be rewarded.



    The word hijab comes from the Arabic for veil and is used to describe the headscarves worn by Muslim women. These scarves come in myriad styles and colours. The type most commonly


    worn in the West is a square scarf that covers the head and neck but leaves the face clear.







    The niqab is a veil for the face that leaves the area around the eyes clear. However, it may be worn with a separate eye veil. It is worn with an accompanying headscarf.








    The burka is the most concealing of all Islamic veils. It covers the entire face and body, leaving just a mesh screen to see through.







    The al-amira is a two-piece veil. It consists of a close fitting cap, usually made from cotton or polyester, and an accompanying tube-like scarf.









    The shayla is a long, rectangular scarf popular in the Gulf region. It is wrapped around the head and tucked or pinned in place at the shoulders.







    The khimar is a long, cape-like veil that hangs down to just above the waist. It covers the hair, neck and shoulders completely, but leaves the face clear.








    The chador, worn by many Iranian women when outside the house, is a full-body cloak. It is often accompanied by a smaller headscarf underneath.



    The case for niqab


    Evidence for the obligation of niqab


    There are only a few references to veiling in the hadith and most of these actually refer to the khimar, which is restricted linguistically to head covering. The covering of the face is only mentioned in three hadith and never by the command of the Prophet Muhammad. In fact, in one hadith, the companions of the Prophet Muhammad are even surprised at one woman's wearing of the niqab during her time of bereavement.


    The main evidence from scholars who believe that niqab is obligatory comes from these verses of the Qur'an.


    O Prophet! Tell thy wives and daughters, and the believing women, that they should cast their outer garments over their persons (when abroad): that is most convenient, that they should be known (as such) and not molested. And Allah is Oft- Forgiving, Most Merciful.


    Qur'an 33:59


    Scholars, such as Imam Abul A'la Mawdudi from the Indian subcontinent, suggest that these verses refer to covering the entire body, including the face and hands. The order 'cast their outer garments' in Arabic is similar to phrase 'draw together'. Scholars say that as a result of this verse, the women at the time of the Prophet drew together their garments over their entire body, including the face.


    One hadith that is used as evidence for this is:


    Narrated 'Aisha (wife of Prophet Muhammad): The Messenger of God, may the peace and blessings of God be upon him, used to offer the Fajr prayer and some believing women covered with their veiling sheets used to attend the Fajr prayer with him and then they would return to their homes unrecognized.


    Bukhari


    This hadith has been dated some time after verse 33:59 was revealed. Proponents of the niqab say that this hadith shows that the women during the time of the Prophet were not recognisable and hence they must have worn niqab.


    However, other scholars have argued that their faces were unrecognisable because it was dark, not because they were covered up. It is interesting to note that Aisha says 'some' women, and not all. Furthermore she refers to the early-morning prayer and not to any other. It would certainly make it more difficult to see who individuals were if they were dressed in cloaks before sunrise.


    In addition, they have argued that the order 'cast their outer garments over their persons' has been misunderstood. They say that the word 'face' has not been indicated in the Arabic, and it would therefore be wrong to extend the meaning.


    Other proponents of the niqab use this Qur'anic verse for evidence for the niqab.


    ...And when ye ask (the Prophet's wives) for anything ye want, ask them from before a screen: that makes for greater purity for your hearts and for theirs.


    Qur'an 33:53


    The wives of the Prophet were indeed required to wear the niqab by this Qur'anic verse. This is because the special status they had meant they had to be kept clear from all gossip and slander. Scholars say that if the wives of the Prophet, as the best of feminine examples, were required to wear niqab, then the ruling falls on all women.


    However, earlier on in the same chapter, the Qur'an also very clearly states that the Prophet's wives were not similar to other women.


    O Wives of the Prophet! You are not like any of the other women.


    33:32


    Most scholars are in agreement that the verse about the screen, or concealing of the face, is only obligatory on the wives of the Prophet. They say the verses are a clear indication that the wives of the Prophet are much more restricted in their movement due to their political position, and that their code of conduct does not constitute a code of conduct for women in general.


    The case against niqab


    Evidence against the obligation of niqab


    Most scholars, including the four main schools of Islamic jurisprudence, hold the view that niqab is not an obligation.


    They cite a number of references for this opinion.


    Say to the believing men that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty: that will make for greater purity for them: And Allah is well acquainted with all that they do.


    And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof...


    24:30-31


    According to the majority of contemporary scholars 'what is apparent of it' refers to the hands and face.


    Another scholar, Shaykh Kutty, a senior lecturer and an Islamic scholar at the Islamic Institute of Toronto, Ontario, Canada suggests that because God asks both men and women to lower their gaze, it suggests their faces are visible, otherwise there would be no sense in it.


    Scholars holding this view also state that it is well accepted by all scholars that the Prophet categorically forbade people from covering their faces or hands during hajj, the pilgrimage to Mecca. If it was necessary that the hands and face be covered at all times, he would not have stated its impermissibility during one of the most sacred points of a person's life.


    It is also generally held by the majority of scholars, including those that believe niqab is obligatory, that covering the face during the five daily prayers is also prohibited.


    Another strong indication that niqab is not an obligation is presented in this hadith.


    Abdullah bin Abbas reports that the Prophet was riding a camel with Al-Fadhl, Abdullah's brother, behind him. A beautiful woman came to ask the Prophet about the Hajj of her father. Al Fadhl began to stare at her; her beauty impressed him a lot. The Prophet (peace be upon him) having noticed this while Al Fadhl was busy looking, put his hand behind and turned his face away from her hither and thither as she went along with them. Al Abbas said to the Prophet, "you are twisting the neck of your nephew!" The Prophet replied, "I noticed that both the boy and the girl were young; and I feared that Satan may intervene".


    Tirmidhi and Bukhari


    Scholars argue that the Prophet controlled the boy Al Fadhl's gaze, but didn't mention the fact that the woman was not covering her face. As a rule, anything that Prophet Muhammad stays silent about is tacit approval. This hadith would seem to indicate strongly that niqab is not obligatory.


    لتحميل كتبي فضلاً الضغط على الصورة التالية - متجدد بإذن الله

    نقره لتكبير أو تصغير الصورة ونقرتين لعرض الصورة في صفحة مستقلة بحجمها الطبيعي



  9. #119
    تاريخ التسجيل
    Sep 2006
    المشاركات
    1,550
    الدين
    الإسلام
    آخر نشاط
    22-03-2017
    على الساعة
    08:38 AM

    افتراضي



    Scholars in the west
    Obligation vs recommendation
    Some contemporary scholars have gone further in their rulings about the niqab in the West. Although they may agree with its practice in Muslim countries, they say that it is harmful in the West and should therefore be avoided.
    Shaykh Darsh, a prominent UK scholar, did not believe that the niqab was necessary, or even recommended by the Prophet for women to wear. But if you were going to argue that niqab was a recommended act, he explained his opinion for wearing niqab in this country in the following way:
    · Some people believe that niqab is recommended (sunnah)
    · Everybody believes that inviting people to Islam (da'wah) is obligatory (fardh)
    · The niqab is often a very significant barrier to da'wah in the West where the concept of face covering has never been known
    · If a recommended act is a barrier to an obligatory act, one must not sacrfice the fardh for the sunnah
    Shaykh Nuh Keller, a Jordanian Shafi'i scholar and translator of Reliance of the Traveller, has put forward a similar argument for women in the West. He says that women should not wear niqab in the West because it can lead to harassment and act as a barrier to inviting people to Islam.
    A question of choice
    Freedom of choice
    Although the much stronger scholarly opinion holds that the niqab is not an obligation in Islam, it is appreciated that there is an opinion which believes it is. Differences in opinion are respected and celebrated, which is why a follower of one of these opinions will rarely say the other is completely wrong, or haram.
    Niqab has a place in Islam, since the Prophet's wives were required to wear them. In today's context, many women attempt to emulate the best of women to bring themselves closer to God.
    لتحميل كتبي فضلاً الضغط على الصورة التالية - متجدد بإذن الله

    نقره لتكبير أو تصغير الصورة ونقرتين لعرض الصورة في صفحة مستقلة بحجمها الطبيعي



  10. #120
    تاريخ التسجيل
    Sep 2006
    المشاركات
    1,550
    الدين
    الإسلام
    آخر نشاط
    22-03-2017
    على الساعة
    08:38 AM

    افتراضي






    Hijab
    Introduction


    A girl studying the Qur'an
    Hijab is an Arabic word meaning barrier or partition.
    In Islam, however, it has a broader meaning. It is the principle of modesty and includes behaviour as well as dress for both males and females.
    The most visible form of hijab is the head covering that many Muslim women wear. Hijab however goes beyond the head scarf. In one popular school of Islamic thought, hijab refers to the complete covering of everything except the hands, face and feet in long, loose and non see-through garments. A woman who wears hijab is called Muhaajaba.
    Muslim women are required to observe the hijab in front of any man they could theoretically marry. This means that hijab is not obligatory in front of the father, brothers, grandfathers, uncles or young children.
    Hijab does not need to be worn in front of other Muslim women, but there is debate about what can be revealed to non-Muslim women.
    Modesty rules are open to a wide range of interpretations. Some Muslim women wear full-body garments that only expose their eyes. Some cover every part of the body except their face and hands. Some believe only their hair or their cleavage is compulsory to hide, and others do not observe any special dress rules.
    In the English speaking world, use of the word hijab has become limited to mean the covering on the head of Muslim woman. However, this is more accurately called a khimaar. The khimaar is a convenient solution comprising usually one, but sometimes two pieces of cloth, enabling Muslim women to cover their hair, ears and neck while outside the home.
    Hijab, in the sense of veiling, can also be achieved by hanging a curtain or placing a screen between women and men to allow them to speak to each other without changing dress. This was more common in the early days of Islam, for the wives of the Prophet Muhammad.
    Hijab in the Qur'an
    What the Qur'an says about the veil and modesty
    The Qur'an makes a few references to Muslim clothing, but prefers to point out more general principles of modest dress.
    Say to the believing men that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty: that will make for greater purity for them: And Allah is well acquainted with all that they do.
    24:30
    And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, [a list of relatives], [household servants], or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex; and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments. And O ye Believers! turn ye all together towards Allah, that ye may attain Bliss.
    24:31
    Both men and women are commanded to lower their gaze and "guard their modesty".
    The most basic interpretation of "guard their modesty" is to cover the private parts, which includes the chest in women ("draw their veils over their bosoms"). However, many scholars interpret this injunction in a more detailed way and use Hadith (recorded sayings of the Prophet Muhammad) to support their views.
    Zeenah (ornaments) is another word with numerous meanings. It has been interpreted to mean body parts, beauty, fine clothes or literal ornaments like jewellery. (The same word is used in chapter 7:31 - "O Children of Adam! wear your beautiful apparel at every time and place of prayer...")
    The jewellery interpretation is supported by the instruction to women not to stamp their feet to draw attention to themselves. It used to be the practice among Arabian women to wear ankle chains to attract men.
    The word translated here as veils is khumur, plural of khimaar. According to scholars, the word khimaar has no other meaning than a type of cloth which covers the head. Muslim scholars point out that men's turbans are sometimes called khumur as well.
    Women during the time of Muhammad did wear the khimaar, but would wear it tied behind so their neck and upper chest were visible. This verse is therefore an order that the khimaar now be drawn over the chest, so that the neck and chest were not bare.
    According to most scholars, the khimaar is obligatory for Muslim women.
    The phrase "what must ordinarily appear thereof" has been interpreted in many different ways. Among Muslims who take the word zeenah (ornaments) to refer to body parts, a popular interpretation of this phrase is that women should only show the body parts that are necessary for day-to-day tasks. This is usually taken to be the face and the hands.
    Some scholars recommend hiding everything but the eyes. The style of burqa worn by Afghan women even hides the eyes. Muslims who oppose full concealment say that if Allah wanted women to hide their entire bodies, there would have been no need to tell male Muslims to lower their gaze.
    But "what must ordinarily appear thereof" could be understood as meaning the parts of the body that are shown when wearing normal (modest) dress, with the definition of normal dress deliberately left up to the believers' particular time and culture. This could explain why the Qur'an is not more specific: if God had wanted to, he could have listed the acceptable body parts in as much detail as the list of exceptions to the rule.
    Some scholars interpret "what must ordinarily appear thereof" to mean that if a woman exposes part of her body by accident, she will be forgiven. All agree that women will not be punished for breaking the rules if some emergency forces them to do so.
    Cast their outer garments over their persons
    O Prophet! Tell thy wives and daughters, and the believing women, that they should cast their outer garments over their persons (when abroad): that is most convenient, that they should be known (as such) and not molested. And Allah is Oft- Forgiving, Most Merciful.
    33:59
    This verse is directed to all Muslim women. An alternative translation is "they should lengthen their garments".
    The word translated here as "outer garments" is jalabib, the plural of jilbab. But it does not necessarily refer to the present day garment known as jilbab. Translators usually represent the word jalabib with general terms like cloaks or outer garments.
    The two most common scholarly interpretations of jilbab are a travelling coat or cloak and a sheet-like full body garment similar to the modern jilbab. Some insist that the Qur'anic meaning of jilbab is identical to the present day garment. Others maintain that today's garment was developed as late as 1970 by the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.
    The verse also indicates that the purpose of dressing this way is that women are recognised as Muslims and not harassed. It was not very safe for women to go out during this time when they could be mistaken for prostitutes or assaulted.
    Elderly women
    The rules are relaxed for elderly women:
    Such elderly women as are past the prospect of marriage - there is no blame on them if they lay aside their (outer) garments, provided they make not a wanton display of their beauty: but it is best for them to be modest: and Allah is One Who sees and knows all things.
    24:60
    General rules
    The Qur'an gives these general rules, which may help in understanding how to interpret dress and other rules in modern times.
    O ye Children of Adam! We have bestowed raiment upon you to cover your shame, as well as to be an adornment to you. But the raiment of righteousness,- that is the best. Such are among the Signs of Allah, that they may receive admonition!
    7:26
    So clothing does not have to be drab: it is all right for both sexes to use clothing to enhance beauty as well as to cover nakedness. The most important thing is to be modest and righteous.


    لتحميل كتبي فضلاً الضغط على الصورة التالية - متجدد بإذن الله

    نقره لتكبير أو تصغير الصورة ونقرتين لعرض الصورة في صفحة مستقلة بحجمها الطبيعي



صفحة 12 من 14 الأولىالأولى ... 2 11 12 13 ... الأخيرةالأخيرة

قالوا عن المرأة وياليتهم ما قالوا


معلومات الموضوع

الأعضاء الذين يشاهدون هذا الموضوع

الذين يشاهدون الموضوع الآن: 1 (0 من الأعضاء و 1 زائر)

المواضيع المتشابهه

  1. قالوا عن المرأة في الإسلام
    بواسطة أُم عبد الله في المنتدى شبهات حول المرأة في الإسلام
    مشاركات: 1
    آخر مشاركة: 05-08-2014, 04:14 PM
  2. قالوا عن المرأة في الإسلام
    بواسطة Abou Anass في المنتدى شبهات حول المرأة في الإسلام
    مشاركات: 2
    آخر مشاركة: 24-04-2014, 07:35 PM
  3. قالوا عن المرأة
    بواسطة صقر قريش في المنتدى منتدى الأسرة والمجتمع
    مشاركات: 82
    آخر مشاركة: 17-04-2012, 10:02 PM
  4. قالوا عن المرأة في الإسلام
    بواسطة ronya في المنتدى منتديات المسلمة
    مشاركات: 11
    آخر مشاركة: 16-06-2008, 08:21 AM
  5. قالوا عن المرأة
    بواسطة سواد الليل في المنتدى المنتدى العام
    مشاركات: 2
    آخر مشاركة: 24-01-2007, 08:42 AM

الكلمات الدلالية لهذا الموضوع

المفضلات

المفضلات

ضوابط المشاركة

  • لا تستطيع إضافة مواضيع جديدة
  • لا تستطيع الرد على المواضيع
  • لا تستطيع إرفاق ملفات
  • لا تستطيع تعديل مشاركاتك
  •  

قالوا عن المرأة وياليتهم ما قالوا

قالوا عن المرأة وياليتهم ما قالوا