tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7748546794339601451.post4054727071684195096..comments2024-02-16T11:28:01.863-06:00Comments on Moore Perspective: Female Head-coverings in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 (Part 1 of 5): Context and Translationamerikiwihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03392673888503758721noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7748546794339601451.post-8186132059015008702013-07-05T19:22:33.313-05:002013-07-05T19:22:33.313-05:00Excellent post Kevin - thank you.Excellent post Kevin - thank you.Trent Wheelerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06939611657365080582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7748546794339601451.post-25139864413192338872013-06-09T15:29:36.300-05:002013-06-09T15:29:36.300-05:00Jeremy, Thank you for your "pushback." I...Jeremy, Thank you for your "pushback." I have four more posts coming and address each of the points you've raised, so I won't respond to them now at length. You say that Paul doesn't appeal to custom, but he uses the word "custom" in v. 16. Creation order is linked to gender roles, not the head-covering. Nature and angels cannot mean what many commentators have alleged (to be discussed). You say that Paul appeals to "the universal practice of the church," yet Paul says "we do not have such a custom nor [do] the churches of God." He is alluding to what the churches do not have rather than what the churches practice. The English translation of v. 10 you have quoted has altered (and thereby misconstrued) what the text actually says. I am happy to consider your feedback, but I suggest you read all five posts (4 more to come) and we can discuss any disagreements you might have. In the meantime I will check out what you're planning to write elsewhere. God bless. KMamerikiwihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03392673888503758721noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7748546794339601451.post-43127538763306610912013-06-09T06:52:11.074-05:002013-06-09T06:52:11.074-05:00Hi Kevin, may I provide a little pushback?
Paul d...Hi Kevin, may I provide a little pushback?<br /><br />Paul doesn't appeal to custom, but to the creation order, nature, angels and the universal practice of the church. It's not proper hermeneutics to assign a reason for Paul saying something when he himself lets us know what his reasoning is ("that is why a woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head..." (v.10).<br /><br />Some food for thought :) Thanks brother for an open ear. I'll be writing more extensively on this topic at www.headcoveringmovement.com shortly if that's of interest to you.Jeremy Gardinerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14199844520737239720noreply@blogger.com