Book of 1 Corinthians - Ch. 11, Vs. 1-34 (01/28/2001)

Chapter 11, First Corinthians, Be followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.

Imitate my example, the matter now under discussion, as I deny myself, as I seek to give no offense to anyone, as I endeavor not to alarm the prejudice of others, but in all things to seek their salvation, so do you.

Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the ordinance as I deliver them to you, like the physician who wraps the bitter pill in some honey before he gives it to the patient.

It is wisdom to intermix commendations with our reproofs, that the latter may take more place when accompanied with the former.

But I would have you know something, that the head of every man is

Christ, and the head of the woman is the man, and the head of Christ is

God. What does that mean, head?

The leader. The leader. All right.

Rightful governor or ruler. The head of Christ is

God. In the work of redemption, Christ, as mediator, was subject to the

Father and acted in obedience to him.

So Christians should be subject to Christ, and the woman to the man.

It is the will of God that there should be a difference of condition, and this requires a difference in their appearance.

Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoreth God. What? Dishonoreth.

Dishonoreth his head. What does prophesying mean here,

Bill? Does it mean predictions about the future of God?

All right. I didn't prophesy at that time, but it added to it. The latter was to study and read and understand the

Word. It wasn't for God. All right. Jesse, what do you think? Prophesying.

All right. By the man's praying and prophesying,

I understand he is performing any divine duty, an expounding of scriptures, singing or psalms or the like.

The man is to have his head covered, uncovered. But the woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoreth her head, for that is even all one as she were shaven.

This instance of women prophesying in public worship is an extraordinary case and justified only by the miraculous gifts which such women possessed.

For instance, the ordinary rule to them is silence in public.

For if the woman be not covered... Did that lie under the other places in the scripture and refer to women should be able to teach the children and counsel other women?

Would this prophesying refer to only the leadership, direct leadership of an authoritarian rule in the church?

But as far as the rule was spelled out by the scripture and people out there telling them when it was spelled, who they were, what they saw, was that incorrect?

I think that the women have the right to teach women. They have the right to teach children.

It's an extraordinary case when they have the right to speak out in public. That men have the controlling influence.

It says later, if a woman desires to know, let her ask her husband at home.

Now, we don't practice that very much. I'm not saying we shouldn't, but that's the way

I think it is. I have a question on that scripture.

It's all about a man's not supposed to cover his head. Don't the Jewish, don't they still cover their heads?

Yes. That started later on. What? Well, didn't that start later than what

Paul, that cultural, that act of starting to cover the head was later than this writing?

Well, it's still under the law. The Jewish man wears,

I don't know what they call it, but a special cap. What?

So it was called a cap? Yes. And I took it that that was still under the law.

But thinking back, I can't find any place where it's mentioned under the law. Well, who knows, but one of my books said that it started in the 4th century after Christ.

And they came and picked that up as a habit going forward. But it wasn't under the law in the

Old Testament. And so they modified the cover at that time. Now, you're talking about covering the head?

Yes. But there are also other things that may be added to that building. According to the scriptures, isn't that right?

Yes. You should not be covering your head at all. The Christian Isaiah scripture is right, yes. The man should not cover his head.

But Jesus didn't follow the New Testament. But it wasn't under the New Testament.

It was under the Old Testament. Well, no, I'm just saying that this is in the New Testament saying that.

Yes, yes. Paul was saying that when it was written in the New Testament. They don't read the New Testament, so they're not reading it in this.

That's right. Greg? Well, just for Paul to say something like this, means that there must have been some public practice already in place to do it.

Yes. Whether it's according to some kind of scribe. Wasn't it? But it was represented that they were not in authority, that they were the role of reversal of men for the women.

I'm guessing it is. Yes, it is. They weren't taking their proper leadership roles.

I think that's the lesson that we have today. If we don't take our proper leadership role in love and understanding, then we're asking to cover our heads.

That's all. All right, anything else? This instance of women speaking in public was an extraordinary case.

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.

The shaved head of a woman symbolized prostitution, and it was a shame to do that.

So other than that, the woman's supposed to be covered.

I look around, I see no hats on today. We've either gotten away from this completely or we're not biblical.

It is not preachers that Paul has in mind, nor evil angels who could be tempted, but angels present in worship who would be shocked at the conduct of the woman, since the angels themselves veil their faces before Jehovah.

For a man indeed ought not to cover his head for as much as he is the image of the glory of God, but the woman is the glory of man.

It is the will of God that there should be due subordination of one class of persons to another, and that this should be manifested in their dress and deportment.

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.

The woman was made a helper for the man, for the man was not created upon the woman's account.

And from the original creation of woman she was made for man, to be his proper or suitable helper.

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. That shows submission.

This is a backward way of saying it. For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head.

She ought to be in submission to her husband. From which consideration the apostle infers that both man and woman should look upon their distinct privileges as given them from God.

Women have a place, men have a place. So happens the man is responsible for the home, he is the responsible one, and to him

God looks. The woman is responsible to the man, and upon the man

God looks. For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman.

But all things are of God. Everything has come into being by God.

For as the woman is of the man, for the woman was first taken out of the side of man.

Do you remember that verse? Man has ever since been formed out of the woman, out of the womb of the woman.

But they, as all other creatures, created things, are of God.

Judge in yourselves. Is it common that a woman pray unto

God uncovered? Doth not even nature itself teach you that if a man have long hair it's a shame unto him?

I look around and I see no long hair on men today. In this church.

That in things only respecting decency and in compliance with which there is no violation of the commandment of Christ, the custom of the church of Christ should be determined, should determine us and be as a standing rule unto us.

The custom of the church. But if a woman have long hair it is a glory to her for her hair is given for her covering.

Now this long and short, I think that the woman is not to look like a man.

Man's not to look like a woman. The woman should not have her hair cut as a man does and a man certainly not as a woman does.

The man should dress as a man. The woman should dress as a woman. Not get them mixed up.

But if a woman have long hair it is for her hair is given her for her covering. A covering in the sense already explained a token of her subjection to her man.

As God has made a distinction between men and women, nature and common sense teaches us that it is their appearance it should be duly observed.

I think we have no trouble in this church of telling who's who, woman or man.

There are times out in public when it's hard to tell whether they're a man or a woman.

That's what he's talking about. Her nose, is that where it is? Across the lane, is that where it is?

That's part of it, yes. And I don't wear makeup. You know,

John the Baptist had long hair. What was the group of... Nazarites.

Nazarites, they have long hair as a symbol of separation from the world and their commitment to a certain cause.

As John the Baptist, he later started to represent that he was apart from the world.

So isn't the cut of the hair and clothes basically a symbolism that if you're doing this as a rebellion to the order of God's structure is how the order he wanted it, as he had the order of a family of a husband, a wife, and children, and the order of a church,

Christ, and then the... If you're doing that in a rebellion of righteousness, that is the danger.

It's not the length of hair. It's the... your heart, not a tiny purpose of having hair cut.

If you have a short hair cut that causes you a problem. If you're doing it to rebel, say I'm rebelling against the authority and stuff, that's the real problem.

It's like a guy who wears long hair usually does. That's true.

The Nazirite vow, every Nazirite that let his hair grow was observing a vow.

They didn't let it grow. They wouldn't be a Nazirite if...

The Nazirite doesn't mean I come from a certain part of the country. It means I've taken a vow unto

God. John the Baptist. Yes. That's right.

That's right.

And physically he submitted his body to be crucified to the world and submission to God.

If we could look at ourselves as men in the church and leaders we're supposed to be, if we submitted ourselves to our

Lord in total submission, we wouldn't have the resistance and following.

And as our wives submitted to us and love like we're supposed to. Our Lord it'd be an easy process but when we rebel and lack and not have the love and submission to each of the steps, then our counterparts sometimes struggle with their submission because they see that we don't do our part.

That's right. That's right. I would that you were all like me.

But I don't... I don't... I don't mean it. Your husband is what now?

Well, they didn't have Sunday school.

They didn't have a study of the Bible as we have here. So... So, in Sunday school or Bible study as we look at it now,

I think it's a prerogative of the teacher to call upon you. You speak if your husband agrees but not if he disagrees.

If he says don't talk, then don't talk. If he has not stopped you from talking, same with Deborah, Mary Ann, any of you, you can speak out but for the most part, especially in church, it is not for the woman to speak even if she has the privilege of her husband to speak.

So, other than that, I don't know. All right.

We do have agreements to speak to the other women about loving their husbands and loving their children in any of the areas, right?

And so, if we see something that we feel is incorrect, we are able to present that and talk about it.

Correct? In... In a women's class or a group of women, you would speak only what your husband would approve of.

Got it? And one more thing. Submission and this is what I struggle with.

Submission physically in obedience to God but not your whole heart or your mind in obedience to God is proper.

That means if you are physically submitting to your husband or whatever authority on the outside but you have turmoil on the inside, that's not submission.

No. Those two have to be in union and that's where the difficulty...

I don't have this with my husband. I don't know. We have an excellent excellent relationship and when

I submit to him it's wholeheartedly it's with my heart, my mind and my physical relationship.

So, in that aspect that leaves with God but if there's submission on the outside but it's inside it's not there, we are submitting to him.

that's right. That's rebellion. Right. Even if you don't do it physically. Yes. It's rebellion if you keep quiet forever.

And you don't believe that in your heart. That's right. That's what I'm taught. So, if you speak it and you work it out and you pray about it and you're able to be as one and submit to him with your whole heart then you have peace.

Like, I see peace in his tissues and I don't see that anymore.

And I think that also affects what my husband said. She sees you submitting to Christ so it's easy for her to do it.

That's right. So, the rebellion is not there because the alignment, right? Right.

That's right. That's right. Right. So, it's allowed to be consistent when you're speaking in the church service.

Is it in the church service? No. So, when we have a woman speaking in the church service, does it be wrong?

Well, if we're going to enforce it, if we have selective enforcement, that's wrong.

I know it's also in the church service. A lot of times they will speak and feel like God is intensely involved in this problem.

They'll give you the tissue what to do with So, that would be consistent in the church service.

Yes. I'm not saying we observe it right. I don't know.

I have a problem with this. If we're going to do it,

I don't have any problem with the church service.

I don't have any problem with the church I don't have any problem with the church service. I don't have any problem with the church service.

I don't have any problem with the church service. I don't have any problem with church service.

service. have any problem with service. problem with It's about us teaching that women are not to serve the poor, you're a man and he's a man.

So when you have a woman get up there, and she's teaching us about where this song is coming from, things like that, it should be done.

Does that mean it's a man and no man can send you to do it at the door when

I use a woman? Now that's getting kind of complicated.

I know, I know, I'm just saying that it's getting kind of complicated. I think that it's like nowadays, you know, you had

Deborah in the old days, okay, so that was for war, and God used her now.

Nowadays, it's a man and a woman, right, so it's a man and a woman. That's good.

Also, I just shouldn't let the women in the church wear hats, then? I'm not going to get into that.

On the hat. I grew up in a time when kids always wore hats.

And they killed, to speak out, they killed, they covered a local

Jew of sin. What I say about that is that a woman's hair is a symbol of her sufficient husband.

This whole thing is almost sufficient husband thing. Women can answer the why of authority.

Why the man, the why, the truth. That's the why of authority.

And I don't see, I don't see this scripture teaching that women can't sing faithfully.

I don't see that. I don't hear that. That's not true.

So I think our pastor could say we've got to hear women sing. I do.

I think that it's part of the getting ready to worship and not teaching.

They're just singing. They're not really singing. Clarence? I also believe that the intent is really the fact that a person feels that to not wear a hat, a lady not wearing a hat, would be a rebellion against the proper structure of the family and of Christ the

Lord. It all means she should wear a hat. If she feels by conducting herself in a proper manner and wearing a hat and dressed in a proper manner such that it is not a rebellion against the structure, then there is no need for a hat or other means.

You can go to the point where, should they wear jeans or pantsuits or other forms of clothing or should they only wear dress?

Should they cut their hair at all? Should they wear makeup or not makeup? Should men what they should wear?

I think it all reflects if the purpose is a rebellion against authority, then that is wrong.

And they should submit to it. But if it's not that, then there's no reason. Somewhere in here,

Paul comes back and he says this is part of the custom. All that time, this is not doctrine or dogma of the church.

This is only like the Middle East today where women wear the veils and the hoods over when they marry.

That's not the custom in a lot of other areas. So they're not under that requirement. It's a reflection of whether you're in rebellion or not in rebellion.

And get into the thing that they should wear a hat or not a hat or lift their hair or not their hair or whether they should sing in church or not sing in church outside of the frame.

If they're doing the rebellion against authority, it's wrong. But if you just say it's wrong, if I stand up there and I sing and challenge the rebellion against our

Lord Jesus Christ, that would be wrong too. Just for you to try to sing might be wrong.

It would be. If he had that hair, he's going to sing it. I think the same thing would apply with hair.

I don't want long hair. But in the same respect, I've seen men with longer hair than what

I wear, and I don't necessarily look at him and think he's trying to look like a woman. You know, and where is that fine line?

Where do you draw the line and say, I mean, I love society. You know, in town where we live within the

United States, it's completely different when you go to a foreign country, especially with the women.

Like you said, over in Iran and Iraq, the women, their customs are completely different.

But I agree with him. I think of this when you, you know, it's hard.

I can't look at some guy. Well, to bring all of this to a close,

I think that whatever the custom is, if it falls, if you do it as a custom, and it doesn't violate the ordinances of God, if it doesn't affect your salvation, then you do the custom.

Our custom is what you see now. Women singing without hats.

I cannot say that you should wear a hat today, or you should not dress as a man today.

I will say if you do it, as Clarence stated, in rebellion, it's wrong.

Brother, let me just get this a little further. You have now groups of young folks called skinheads, and what they do is they shave their heads right on down, just as close to the skin as they can get.

They do that as a sign of rebellion, and they have no good thoughts that I have aware of, and I hope you do.

Now, that is just as much of an act of defiance as it was in the 60s when the same groups of people grew their hair long as signs of rebellion, and both of those were signs of rebellion, and rebellion was there in both cases, and both were wrong.

And not whether the hair was long or short, but the fact that they were rebellious and trying to go outside the lines of the norm.

That's why I want to go back to what Clarence said, and I believe wholeheartedly, hey,

God knows, God knows whether you are doing what you're doing to be disruptive and to be seditious, or whether you are doing what you're doing in order to try to be in the religious spiritual way.

He knows that. We'll have to leave it there that God knows. When we, in your church body, and this being our church body, if we are aware that something offends a person, then we are not to do a threat.

Yes. So if the person doesn't come to you and say that, and you're not aware of it, and you do it, then you're fine, right?

As far as I know. The reason I'm saying that is that I'm reading Scripture today. I don't think, but I always, always submit to any time

I can read the Word of God. In fact, I think it's a blessing to proclaim the

Word of God, even if it's just reading it to anyone. So I'm reading that, and if someone knows at all that that would offend them,

I would read it. Do you know what I'm saying? I think it's important that as a bond of believers, especially out here, that we speak to one another and let one another know things so that we're able to operate and not cause harm to someone.

Right? Yes. Let's move on to 18.

Brother Lewis, can I say one more thing? Yes. We as a church, we have a lot of people in leadership positions, people like myself, like Joseph Agnes up there, and they're going to see that things are done properly and in order in the church more than...

They have more responsibility to that than the members of the church. And if things like that go wrong when we're teaching the church, then

I think God, on the whole, the leadership is more responsible for that than the membership. That's right.

Even if I make it wrong, but, you know, for a woman to end up teaching the scriptures or doing it before she sings or whatever, and the leadership still wants to do that, there's nothing that we members can do.

God will hold the leadership responsible for that. That's right. And the leadership is held responsible whether they react or not.

For first of all, when you come together in the church, I hear that there are divisions among you, and partly

I believe it, for there must be also heresies among you that they which are appointed, approved, may be made manifest among you.

When you come together, therefore, into one place, this is not to eat the

Lord's supper exclusively, which they should have done and not have made it a part of the main ordeal.

For in eating, everyone taketh before another his own supper, and one is hungry, another is drunken.

We don't have that problem. What, have you not houses to eat and to drink in, or despise you the church of God and shame them that have not?

What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you in this? I praise you not. How shall

I sufficiently express my surprise at this and my disapproval at this course?

It cannot be possible that this is right. It is not possible to conceal surprise and amazement that this custom exists and is tolerated in a

Christian church. For I have received of the Lord that which

I also delivered unto you, notice delivered, past tense, that the

Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was portrayed, took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said,

Take, eat ye, this is my body, which is broken for you, this do in remembrance of me.

After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament of my blood, this do you, as oft as you drink it in remembrance of me.

For as often as you eat this bread, drink this cup, you do show the

Lord's death till he come. Now there's been lots of doctrine founded on this.

They say, some say that the, that you should only have wine and not grape juice.

There are others that say the grape juice turns to the blood of Christ, and when you eat the cracker or wafer, that becomes the body of Christ.

It's all symbolic. For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you do show the

Lord's death till he comes. Wherefore, whosoever shall eat this bread and drink this cup of the

Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the

Lord. Now do we really understand that? If you do it, and you think that you have unconfessed sins, it's dangerous.

But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of that cup.

It is the special duty and ought to be the singular care and endeavor of all those that desire safety and comfortability to approve the table of the

Lord, to examine themselves before they come, to examine their right unto it, and to examine their fitness for it.

For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh damnation to himself.

A damnation should be translated judgment to himself, not discerning the

Lord's body. Learn that the unworthy receivers of the

Lord's supper do contract great guilt and infer great danger.

The design of the Apostle to these two last verses is this, that we should not sinfully omit the duty because of the command for the careless undertaking of it because of the threatened judgment.

For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. There have been

Christians that have been taken out of life. There's Christians that are sick.

This is not saying all sickness is due to this, or all illnesses. For this cause, on account of their irreverent and wicked manner of celebrating the

Lord's supper, many sleep or are dead. God had sent sickness among them, and many died.

For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.

If we would sit in judgment of our spiritual condition and corrected ourselves, we would avert

God's judgment. But when we are judged, we are chastened of the

Lord, and we should not be condemned with the world. Judgments are used to chasten and to bring to repentance and reformation.

Did you know that a sinner cannot repent? Does everybody know that?

Wherefore, my brethren, when you come together to eat, tarry one for another.

And if any man a -hunger, let him eat at home. That you come not together unto condemnation, and the rest

I'll set in order when I come. Lastly, he tells them that as to other points of church order, he would determine them when he came along among them.

The rest will I set in order when I come. Such understanding, such unchristian disorders may arise and the churches will require the presence and coming of an apostle to correct and reform them.

We're not perfect. We cannot hide behind imperfect.

We interpret the scripture the best we know how. I think it is a custom for all of the church women to wear hats.

Then you should wear one. If it's not the custom, you shouldn't. I think no woman should wear her hair like a man or a man like a woman.

Dress the same way. Is there anything now of the last two minutes?

Let's stand and be dismissed. Verge, dismiss us, please. I hear you,

Heavenly Father. I thank you so much for this opportunity. The lesson and the promise,

Lord, Lord, is still buzzing. Take it in our hearts, Lord, and apply it in our lives, Lord.

Whatever conviction that you lay on our hearts, whatever it may be, Lord, it may be a personal conviction,

Lord. It may be if we're convicted of what you lead us to do. Let's not do it, Lord.

Let's not offend others. Lord, I thank you for so much. Brother Oden is giving his strength back,

Lord, and bringing a lesson each day, Lord. I just thank you. The leadership, Lord, and the spirit that you've laid on us,

Lord. Lord, I pray for the day that you restore us together and bring us back to the service,

Lord, so that each one of us on our prayer list can get a portion of your mercy.

Lord, just be with us in the service, Lord. Be with us, Brother Oden, as we pray in the spirit of strength,

Lord. Again, I thank you so much for the love that you have. You're willing to die on the cross for us,

Lord. Help us each day to be more aware of the love that you have, Lord. Good morning.