Let me tell you, head coverings feel so good to wear. I finished my full first day of wearing one- no only to I not want to take it off, but Satan have attacked me a fair amount of times today. I know that it’s making Satan mad that I’m standing up for my faith, and I’m so happy it is!!! update: i want to update and I stopped this practice altogether. i stopped doing it around April-May because my parents were annoying and telling me passive-aggressively to stop. basically telling me stuff with no research so I stopped it. i couldn't handle the little comments here or there genuinely. Then this month (july) I went to a new church. My parents brought me aside after to say 1. I'm in a military town so I can't veil AT CHURCH because I'm giving veterans PTSD. 2. "if God wanted all women to veil then why doesn't all women do?" without any research at all about feminism. even if I had explained this. so to all the people saying "Don't do that" well you're in for a treat because I don't do it anymore. also wishing to get out of my parent's house to find an orthodox church hopefully.
@SisterinChristMel11 ай бұрын
Keep doing it 🥹🙏🏽
@kayaissimo11 ай бұрын
@@SisterinChristMel ❤️
@godman90748 ай бұрын
It's great that you're wearing a head covering, but remember it is only necessary when you are in a church service or praying or prophesying But it's up to you if you want to wear it all day
@ericaoramedina4707 ай бұрын
Hallelujah god bless you I just started my journey so hear everyone story thank you❤
@kayaissimo6 ай бұрын
@@ericaoramedina470your welcome! I wear mine all the time now (going into the new year) and perspective on everything has changed because of it. It’s so worth it :)
@Karina-jb4sc7 ай бұрын
Head coverings in the Christian church is such a controversial topic! I personally wear a head covering while praying, while I’m in the word, at church, or a Bible study! Not many Christian women do this now days but when you read 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 I don’t know how people can say it’s not necessary…
@sammune2 ай бұрын
I want to start, I feel like God is calling me to higher standards and to be modest. I haven’t seen anyone at my church do it and it’s discouraging me but I just know I need to.
@Karina-jb4sc2 ай бұрын
@@sammune if you’re feeling convicted then I say try doing it! Being obedient to what God is calling you to is what God desires from us! I would say start out in little steps! Personally I feel like headbands are considered head coverings and is a great way to start! Or sometimes if I’m praying and don’t have a head covering around I just use my hand! God will be so pleased with you for obeying him and you’ll only strengthen your relationship with him more! I’ll be praying for you! ❤️ it wasn’t easy for me to start as well since no once does it, but I felt a difference praying spiritually once I started!
@funnygaming26722 ай бұрын
@@sammune my first scarf/veil i got them at the dollard store get a color that look nice on you that you like and rock that veil 🧕🏼✝️
@robertmiller812Ай бұрын
I would like to add my two cents here after reading this discussion. First of all I believe we should follow the teaching in 1st Corinthians 11. The main problem here is the misunderstanding of 1st Corinthians 11 altogether. I also have made an intense study of this passage, and the obvious conclusion is that Paul was referring to long hair being the covering. The first thing one should take notice is the lack of wording required to conclude that a veil is being referred to here. The word veil or cloth is not in the text if we read from the King James version. If you read from the “modern” versions then you might get that view but not from the Textus Receptus. I would like for you to reread the verses that allegedly refer to a veil which is 4-7 and 13. In those verses we read the words, cover, uncovered and not covered. According to scholars these are used as adverbs. Like if you were to say I am going to cover my feet. No one should be thinking of a veil just the action of being covered. What is missing in these verses are nouns that would prove the idea of veils. Since we should not be assuming anything we should be asking the question what is the thing that a woman should be covered WITH based on the passage ALONE? So if you do the math you would find that Paul refers to hair directly 3 times and then indirectly 4 times with the words shorn and shaven. So if there is no noun for the word veil or cloth yet there are 7 instances of idea of hair, then what are we to conclude? That Paul is referring to hair whether it be short or long. But the counterargument would be that Paul is allegedly telling women to put something on. But that is not exactly true it says a woman should be covered, but he is referring to long hair based on the surrounding verses. But what about that a woman ought to be covered when praying or prophesying? The assumption is a that Paul was referring to only two instances which is not true he was merely giving us two examples. This also applies to men about being uncovered. Evidence of this is written in the forgoing verses. Paul writes that men ought not to cover because he is the image and glory of God. And then Paul goes into how woman was made for man and is the glory of the man. So it would seem that man shouldn’t be covered at any time if he is the glory and image of God. Paul also mentions that the mere observation of a praying woman should make us note how uncomely (unappealing in appearance) for a woman to be uncovered. Paul states this in a way that it should be obvious to anyone that she looks off in verse 13. He does this again in verse 14 about how shameful it looks if a man has long hair. He says it this way… 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? KJV So this judgement that we should make is exclusively based on observation of an “uncovered” woman as well as a long haired man. Two consecutive questions both appealing to something innate or within us. Paul is in essence saying that it should be obvious to see that something is wrong or off. So how is it that for the women we are somehow to know within us that a woman would be unappealing in appearance without a manufactured veil? That does not seem logical especially since the word veil is never mentioned. Unless that is not what Paul is meaning but rather that if the woman was not covered in long hair (meaning her hair is short) doing something holy or godly LIKE praying or prophesying. I think most people can relate that looking at a woman with short hair does have an unappealing appearance. It naturally provokes head turns. And if there was any question Paul flat out states what he was talking about in verse 15. So the facts are that there no nouns to use as evidence of a veil. There is evidence that Paul was using praying and prophesying as examples. Paul appeals to nature and something innate within us to judge that being uncovered or covered (meaning having short hair or long hair) should be obvious to all. So this cannot make sense with a manufactured veil.
@oreo-zl4uy5 ай бұрын
I just biught my first headscarf:) I am going to throw out my immodest clithes and start fresh! Wish me luck :)
@SisterinChristMel5 ай бұрын
Prayed for you 🥹
@oreo-zl4uy5 ай бұрын
@@SisterinChristMel aww tysm!!!🥺
@SophiaBedelia4 ай бұрын
You should donate instead of throwing them! @oreo-zl4uy
@thegiantbeagleАй бұрын
Woo hoo! How’s it going? Do you like your new style? Do you think you keep modesty? God bless you Jesus loves you!
@oreo-zl4uyАй бұрын
@thegiantbeagle it's going well! A long journey, been on and off when it comes to veiling, it's tough to truly let go of modern style, keeping modesty and getting used to all the new stares with a veil lol🤭 But it's one I love to go on ♡ May God be with you❤️🫶🏻🎀
@HolinessUntoTheLord.8 ай бұрын
Yes, Best decision I ever made too was to dress modestly as a true woman of God should 😌🙏🏾😇 *_Obedience is better than sacrifice_* 🙌🏾🤩
@KaylieLingАй бұрын
For someone who just started wearing head coverings for about a month now, I heard the Lord tell me to start wrapping my head. At first I did it at home, but yesterday was my first time going back to my old church and my first time wearing my head covering in public. Not only have I stopped having nightmares, but I can finally sleep (yes I sleep with my head wrap), I have never felt such peace + protection + alignment with God! Surprisingly I have not gotten any negative comments so far, just positivity, esp from the officer/sheriff at church yesterday who stared with a smile and admiration. I am so glad I immediately obeyed HIS call🙏🏽🙌🏽
@DaughterofYah058 ай бұрын
Yahweh and Yahshua is king 🙏🏾👏 great video 😊
@SisterinChristMel8 ай бұрын
Amen!!!
@B1tchydayyss6 ай бұрын
He is king amen🙏🏾❤️❤️❤️
@SantiagoRodriguez-tz5xh6 ай бұрын
Yahweh = Yashua. Hallelujah
@BeYoutifulinHISimage9 ай бұрын
My perception changed on head coverings and modesty. I wear my head covering mostly when I pray and it feels so comforting and personal when I pray. I wear them when I'm out sometimes and it feels so good to be different. I believe they are beautiful too when I see other women with them on and dressed in modest clothing. Thanks for sharing 😊
@SisterinChristMel9 ай бұрын
Amen!!! God knows best 🥰
@amakajerome29108 ай бұрын
You're blessed sis
@RebeccaMills-vj6gr7 ай бұрын
Same hun I have started to do it again. I left it believing this passage was misinterpreted but after reading Head Coverings by Jeremy Gardiner it encouraged me to study 1 Corinthians 11. This process has confirmed to me that it is a bibical command and not about christian liberty or optional. I actually love doing it knowing it has a beautiful purpose and reason behind it. Bibically you dont have to wear it all the time only when praying or prophesying = coporate worship ❤
@TheAnswerWillleaveyou Жыл бұрын
Yes head-covering are in the Bible
@liberty9784 Жыл бұрын
Can I ask where? What book and verse?? I'm in Bible study so I can just ask there next week . but I'm very interested in it and I find it really beautiful.
@TheAnswerWillleaveyou Жыл бұрын
1 corinthians 11: 3 - 6 I believe 🙏🏽
@liberty9784 Жыл бұрын
@@TheAnswerWillleaveyouthank you so much🎀❣️
@JohnYoder-vi1gj9 ай бұрын
@@liberty9784 @ Try this link to see if this helps
@FA-God-s-Words-Matter2 ай бұрын
If we follow those who subscribe to the doctrine of women wearing veils, then it can be argued that the most often cited verse is 1st Corinth. 11:5, which states: “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.” According to many of those who believe women ought to wear veils this verse supposedly implies that a woman’s uncovered head is a woman who does not wear a veil. Such a woman is either dishonoring God, their own physical head or her husband for failing to wear it which implies that they are in disobedience. Some have gone so far as to say it is a sin. Another assumption is that the woman being referred to already has long hair and since they conclude that the covering is a veil then it must be referring to an “additional” covering otherwise it would clash with verse 15 stating that God gave women long hair for a covering. Another conclusion is that women ought to be covered ONLY when praying and prophesying and for men to be uncovered, which would make it seem as though it were something that can be placed on or taken off like a veil. You’ve probably noticed by now it takes several assumptions to reach the conclusion that women ought to wear a foreign object on their heads, despite the lack of evidence. * Does the Bible really give a clear command that women should wear a veil? The first thing that everyone must understand when talking about this topic is that it DOES NOT say the word “veil” or “cloth” or any other physical headwear, as far as the KJV is concerned. It surely mentions that the woman’s head should be covered, and no one disputes this, but it does not say that it should be covered with a veil, a shawl, a bonnet, a cap, or any other specific headwear. The verses in question within 1st Corinthians 11 mention the words, cover, covered, uncovered, and covering, but that does not mean we can translate this to mean specifically a veil, a shawl, a bonnet, a cap, or anything else similar. In fact, it would seem more like an adverb rather than a noun. Nevertheless, the word “cover” is unfortunately interpreted by head covering promoters to mean a veil above all other types of headwear, even if there is no evidence to prove that beyond a shadow of a doubt. To do so would mean that one is trying to read more into the verse than what is stated and is not truly seeking an exegesis of the Scriptures. Some have claimed that they are referring to a physical synthetic head covering because the Scriptures seem to indicate that there are two exclusive conditions to wear one and that is when a woman is either praying and/or prophesying. But does this interpretation stand up to logic? If we were to believe that under certain conditions a woman ought to wear a physical head covering, then it stands to reason that under OTHER conditions a woman should be able NOT to wear one. For example, if you are going to argue that a woman ought to wear a veil because the Bible claims there are two conditions, then it is logical to presume that any other condition would ALLOW them to be without one, like speaking in tongues, interpreting tongues, healing the sick, casting out devils, etc. Now if a head covering promoter should claim that there are MORE conditions, then they admit that there aren’t really “two” conditions thereby nullifying the two-condition argument. The reasoning behind why the “two-condition” argument is important for veil promoters is because if these words were actual conditions, then it would seem as though the covering were something that can be placed on or taken off. So even though it does not literally or EXPLICITLY say anything about putting on or taking off a veil. Veil promotors form this belief based on what they believe to be IMPLIED and not by a direct statement. Many people like to believe this because they ASSUME that praying and prophesying are two conditions instead of seeing them as mere examples. * Praying and prophesying were meant to be viewed as examples, not conditions… Now I can understand how someone can mistakenly conclude praying and prophesying as conditions in verse 5, on the surface, but once you read the rest of the verses in context one cannot reach that conclusion. If they were meant to be conditions then why would Paul say in verse 7… “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.” If the reason for men not to cover their heads in this verse is because he is the “image and glory of God,” then why assume Paul was saying that there were only TWO conditions in verse 4? Wouldn’t 7 override any supposed conditions? Shouldn’t that make you question that perhaps Paul was just giving a couple of examples? But let’s continue. Verses 8 and 9 give us another understanding that Paul must have been referring to praying and prophesying as examples because he adds the order of creation into the mix. “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.” If Paul states that the creation order has something to do with the reason as to why women ought to cover (in long hair) and men to be uncovered (aka have short hair) then we can conclude that this doctrine must be bound in NATURE. That is to say that it must have taken place since the creation of Adam and Eve and BEFORE the manufacturing of veils or hats, and BEFORE the creation of churches, which is another reason why hair easily fits the mold. This is confirmed when reading verses 13 and 14 when Paul asks you to make an observational judgment that if it is comely (aka pleasant looking) for a woman to pray uncovered (in short hair) and that even NATURE teaches us that a man with long hair is shameful. Why would Paul ask you to think that something as unnatural as a woman without a hat would look off and then say something as natural as long hair would look off on a man? Paul was saying that not being covered in long hair especially while praying looks uncomely and in the same breath he continues and says men with long hair also looks naturally wrong. * So Is the Covering Long Hair or a Veil? ….. If we examine all the verses from verses 4 to 15 without bias, we should at least agree that at certain points the verses are referring to physical heads and hair. Now some have tried to argue that the covering is somehow Jesus or men (some erroneously add husband here as well). But since the passage in 1st Corinthians 11 already states that the man or Jesus are already referred to as the heads one should not mix things up and add that they are the covering especially when this word is referring to something else entirely, Plus it wouldn’t make sense if we were to replace the word covering, covered or uncovered with Jesus, man or husband. So, do the words “covered,” “cover,” “uncovered” and “covering” refer to long and/or short hair or some kind of foreign head covering? Some will even say all the above, but if we carefully examine verse 15 we would be getting a clearer picture of what was being referred to in the earlier verses when it mentions these words. “But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her FOR a covering." KJV So if the covering is long hair, then the words “covered” or “cover” (which are synonymous with “covering”) should be understood as long hair as well. If that’s true, then to be “uncovered” would mean “short hair.” If so, then we can get a better picture of verse 4 when it says that it is shameful or dishonorable for a man to pray or prophesy with his head “covered.” Note the similarity of verse 4 to verse 14 that’s because they are both referring to being covered in LONG hair.
@crosbyllc54269 ай бұрын
Absolutely Beautiful...
@NeoMusic-b5e13 күн бұрын
God bless you daughter of God for being an example
@MGS.0377 ай бұрын
Amen, i think Christians should wear head covering
@matildamaher111Ай бұрын
I've been wearing a head covering for 9 yrs now. Only for church service, reading the Holy Bible and praying
@MGS.037Ай бұрын
@@matildamaher111 so good 😊 God bless you
@rachaelbenhasenn44607 күн бұрын
You look stunning ☺️✨
@G.B.V33 ай бұрын
Looking Beautiful and elegant, Dearest Sister 🌿✝️🌹
@mammamia888210 күн бұрын
I feel very comfortable, covering my hair, showing little hair and looking very presentable and modest. My employer stated per policy, head covering is not allowed. I look around my workplace, we have every denomination, Muslim, Sikhism, Hinduism, Islam, and Sufism. We have Amish, Mennonite and brethren, and a whole host of other religions that work for the same institution. And they freely were head coverings without any problem. So to explain that it is my belief that I need to cover my head, yet told that I was not allowed to. It seems that to be devout is only allowed if you are of certain religious practices and groups.
@Razzy.Rea138 ай бұрын
Veiling is so beautiful! I want to veil but I'm a white 15-year-old girl and my church is a Pentecostal church so am I able to veil? and I don't even know if my parents will let me because my dad is the pastor of our church
@SisterinChristMel8 ай бұрын
Pray to the Lord for guidance always. Study biblical backings for your conviction to veil. And your father is the head of your household so it’s important to have his input on it too. At the end of the day, it’s a conviction that does not affect doctrine, but meditate on what God’s Word has to say about it 🤍🕊
@Razzy.Rea138 ай бұрын
@@SisterinChristMel Thank you so much! And I have been praying and asking if it's the right thing to do and I keep feeling it in my heart like it should but I'm going to study and pray more until I feel like it's the right thing to please God and get closer to him and then I'll ask my parents!! But thank you for the input I hope you have a blessed day!! 🩷
@SisterinChristMel8 ай бұрын
@@Razzy.Rea13 this might help as well kzfaq.info/get/bejne/adWVlKdpmKiVm2Q.htmlsi=SWK35wb63uvBIO0-
@Maries_Angels_LLC7 ай бұрын
I am actually going through the same dilemma & im 35, the Holy Spirit has been convicting me for about 1 year now. So I’ve decided for 2024 that I WILL begin veiling for the New Year 🎉to glory be GOD 🙏🏽
@SisterinChristMel7 ай бұрын
@@Maries_Angels_LLC amen sis 🫶🏽
@elise.claireeАй бұрын
I’m 12 and have decided to start wearing a veil and when I put on veil for the first time I felt closer to Jesus and God than I’ve ever before.
@Thehumansmilyface2 ай бұрын
PRAISE GOD! Amen so beautiful 💞
@SisterinChristMel2 ай бұрын
As are you 🥰
@briddle354312 күн бұрын
To be clear...I am the daughter of the King with or without a veil. Please don't make this seem like it's required or demanded by God. It's not.
@SisterinChristMel11 күн бұрын
I never implied nor mentioned such a matter. That’s rather projection. Be blessed!
@ChildofTMH1444 күн бұрын
You sound like a heathen
@Zacmax-ec4wm17 күн бұрын
I thought only wives are supposed to veil for their husbands Correct me if im wrong 💗
@SisterinChristMel16 күн бұрын
I’m a wife 🥰
@cheryljohnston868715 күн бұрын
Yea it is only for wives. It's like an wedding ring. But a lot of people in the comments aren't married and say they do. if they it makes them feel in line with Yah I don't see an issue.
@ericaoramedina4707 ай бұрын
Hallelujah
@SisterinChristMel7 ай бұрын
🙌🏽🙌🏽🙌🏽
@FA-God-s-Words-Matter2 ай бұрын
If we follow those who subscribe to the doctrine of women wearing veils, then it can be argued that the most often cited verse is 1st Corinth. 11:5, which states: “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.” According to many of those who believe women ought to wear veils this verse supposedly implies that a woman’s uncovered head is a woman who does not wear a veil. Such a woman is either dishonoring God, their own physical head or her husband for failing to wear it which implies that they are in disobedience. Some have gone so far as to say it is a sin. Another assumption is that the woman being referred to already has long hair and since they conclude that the covering is a veil then it must be referring to an “additional” covering otherwise it would clash with verse 15 stating that God gave women long hair for a covering. Another conclusion is that women ought to be covered ONLY when praying and prophesying and for men to be uncovered, which would make it seem as though it were something that can be placed on or taken off like a veil. You’ve probably noticed by now it takes several assumptions to reach the conclusion that women ought to wear a foreign object on their heads, despite the lack of evidence. * Does the Bible really give a clear command that women should wear a veil? The first thing that everyone must understand when talking about this topic is that it DOES NOT say the word “veil” or “cloth” or any other physical headwear, as far as the KJV is concerned. It surely mentions that the woman’s head should be covered, and no one disputes this, but it does not say that it should be covered with a veil, a shawl, a bonnet, a cap, or any other specific headwear. The verses in question within 1st Corinthians 11 mention the words, cover, covered, uncovered, and covering, but that does not mean we can translate this to mean specifically a veil, a shawl, a bonnet, a cap, or anything else similar. In fact, it would seem more like an adverb rather than a noun. Nevertheless, the word “cover” is unfortunately interpreted by head covering promoters to mean a veil above all other types of headwear, even if there is no evidence to prove that beyond a shadow of a doubt. To do so would mean that one is trying to read more into the verse than what is stated and is not truly seeking an exegesis of the Scriptures. Some have claimed that they are referring to a physical synthetic head covering because the Scriptures seem to indicate that there are two exclusive conditions to wear one and that is when a woman is either praying and/or prophesying. But does this interpretation stand up to logic? If we were to believe that under certain conditions a woman ought to wear a physical head covering, then it stands to reason that under OTHER conditions a woman should be able NOT to wear one. For example, if you are going to argue that a woman ought to wear a veil because the Bible claims there are two conditions, then it is logical to presume that any other condition would ALLOW them to be without one, like speaking in tongues, interpreting tongues, healing the sick, casting out devils, etc. Now if a head covering promoter should claim that there are MORE conditions, then they admit that there aren’t really “two” conditions thereby nullifying the two-condition argument. The reasoning behind why the “two-condition” argument is important for veil promoters is because if these words were actual conditions, then it would seem as though the covering were something that can be placed on or taken off. So even though it does not literally or EXPLICITLY say anything about putting on or taking off a veil. Veil promotors form this belief based on what they believe to be IMPLIED and not by a direct statement. Many people like to believe this because they ASSUME that praying and prophesying are two conditions instead of seeing them as mere examples. * Praying and prophesying were meant to be viewed as examples, not conditions… Now I can understand how someone can mistakenly conclude praying and prophesying as conditions in verse 5, on the surface, but once you read the rest of the verses in context one cannot reach that conclusion. If they were meant to be conditions then why would Paul say in verse 7… “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.” If the reason for men not to cover their heads in this verse is because he is the “image and glory of God,” then why assume Paul was saying that there were only TWO conditions in verse 4? Wouldn’t 7 override any supposed conditions? Shouldn’t that make you question that perhaps Paul was just giving a couple of examples? But let’s continue. Verses 8 and 9 give us another understanding that Paul must have been referring to praying and prophesying as examples because he adds the order of creation into the mix. “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.” If Paul states that the creation order has something to do with the reason as to why women ought to cover (in long hair) and men to be uncovered (aka have short hair) then we can conclude that this doctrine must be bound in NATURE. That is to say that it must have taken place since the creation of Adam and Eve and BEFORE the manufacturing of veils or hats, and BEFORE the creation of churches, which is another reason why hair easily fits the mold. This is confirmed when reading verses 13 and 14 when Paul asks you to make an observational judgment that if it is comely (aka pleasant looking) for a woman to pray uncovered (in short hair) and that even NATURE teaches us that a man with long hair is shameful. Why would Paul ask you to think that something as unnatural as a woman without a hat would look off and then say something as natural as long hair would look off on a man? Paul was saying that not being covered in long hair especially while praying looks uncomely and in the same breath he continues and says men with long hair also looks naturally wrong. * So Is the Covering Long Hair or a Veil? ….. If we examine all the verses from verses 4 to 15 without bias, we should at least agree that at certain points the verses are referring to physical heads and hair. Now some have tried to argue that the covering is somehow Jesus or men (some erroneously add husband here as well). But since the passage in 1st Corinthians 11 already states that the man or Jesus are already referred to as the heads one should not mix things up and add that they are the covering especially when this word is referring to something else entirely, Plus it wouldn’t make sense if we were to replace the word covering, covered or uncovered with Jesus, man or husband. So, do the words “covered,” “cover,” “uncovered” and “covering” refer to long and/or short hair or some kind of foreign head covering? Some will even say all the above, but if we carefully examine verse 15 we would be getting a clearer picture of what was being referred to in the earlier verses when it mentions these words. “But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her FOR a covering." KJV So if the covering is long hair, then the words “covered” or “cover” (which are synonymous with “covering”) should be understood as long hair as well. If that’s true, then to be “uncovered” would mean “short hair.” If so, then we can get a better picture of verse 4 when it says that it is shameful or dishonorable for a man to pray or prophesy with his head “covered.” Note the similarity of verse 4 to verse 14 that’s because they are both referring to being covered in LONG hair.
@FA-God-s-Words-MatterАй бұрын
@@victoria-rx4fn “Those who promote a cloth veil as a covering try to use the fact that this word perbolaiou is different than the word katakalupto to prove that it is talking about a “second covering” - the long hair being the first, katakalupto, and the veil being the second, perbolaiou. But, katakalupto is not a noun, and does not mean what veil-promoters say it does. It shows a state of being, and is used as an adverb, say the scholars. Therefore, there are not two nouns - that is, two distinct coverings - being discussed. Rather, a state of being, or condition, is discussed: the man’s head is in a state or condition of being “not hanging-down, covered”, while the woman’s head is in a state of being “hanging-down, covered”. Her hair is given her for a “throw-around”. In other words, the hanging-down hair serves as a throw-around for her head - she is covered, and meets the condition first put forth: that she pray or prophesy with her long hair hanging down on her head. Since it is a shame for a man to have long hair, he is to pray to God with his head “not hanging-down, covered” -- ouk katakaluptesthai.” (Written by Bernie Parsons)
@Victoria.Productions4 ай бұрын
Quick question! What denomination are you? Because as a Protestant Christian ik it’s very uncommon to wear head coverings nowadays, so I was just wondering
@SisterinChristMel4 ай бұрын
I’m a plain ol’ simple follower of Jesus Christ but I am a member of fundamental independent Baptist church, classic hymns in a book and all 🫶🏽 fear God > men ;)
@funnygaming26722 ай бұрын
Don't matter all bible mention head covering ...not following what ask from us in the bible is just nit picking what we want to disobey God and been defiant 🧕✝️
@FA-God-s-Words-Matter2 ай бұрын
If we follow those who subscribe to the doctrine of women wearing veils, then it can be argued that the most often cited verse is 1st Corinth. 11:5, which states: “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.” According to many of those who believe women ought to wear veils this verse supposedly implies that a woman’s uncovered head is a woman who does not wear a veil. Such a woman is either dishonoring God, their own physical head or her husband for failing to wear it which implies that they are in disobedience. Some have gone so far as to say it is a sin. Another assumption is that the woman being referred to already has long hair and since they conclude that the covering is a veil then it must be referring to an “additional” covering otherwise it would clash with verse 15 stating that God gave women long hair for a covering. Another conclusion is that women ought to be covered ONLY when praying and prophesying and for men to be uncovered, which would make it seem as though it were something that can be placed on or taken off like a veil. You’ve probably noticed by now it takes several assumptions to reach the conclusion that women ought to wear a foreign object on their heads, despite the lack of evidence. * Does the Bible really give a clear command that women should wear a veil? The first thing that everyone must understand when talking about this topic is that it DOES NOT say the word “veil” or “cloth” or any other physical headwear, as far as the KJV is concerned. It surely mentions that the woman’s head should be covered, and no one disputes this, but it does not say that it should be covered with a veil, a shawl, a bonnet, a cap, or any other specific headwear. The verses in question within 1st Corinthians 11 mention the words, cover, covered, uncovered, and covering, but that does not mean we can translate this to mean specifically a veil, a shawl, a bonnet, a cap, or anything else similar. In fact, it would seem more like an adverb rather than a noun. Nevertheless, the word “cover” is unfortunately interpreted by head covering promoters to mean a veil above all other types of headwear, even if there is no evidence to prove that beyond a shadow of a doubt. To do so would mean that one is trying to read more into the verse than what is stated and is not truly seeking an exegesis of the Scriptures. Some have claimed that they are referring to a physical synthetic head covering because the Scriptures seem to indicate that there are two exclusive conditions to wear one and that is when a woman is either praying and/or prophesying. But does this interpretation stand up to logic? If we were to believe that under certain conditions a woman ought to wear a physical head covering, then it stands to reason that under OTHER conditions a woman should be able NOT to wear one. For example, if you are going to argue that a woman ought to wear a veil because the Bible claims there are two conditions, then it is logical to presume that any other condition would ALLOW them to be without one, like speaking in tongues, interpreting tongues, healing the sick, casting out devils, etc. Now if a head covering promoter should claim that there are MORE conditions, then they admit that there aren’t really “two” conditions thereby nullifying the two-condition argument. The reasoning behind why the “two-condition” argument is important for veil promoters is because if these words were actual conditions, then it would seem as though the covering were something that can be placed on or taken off. So even though it does not literally or EXPLICITLY say anything about putting on or taking off a veil. Veil promotors form this belief based on what they believe to be IMPLIED and not by a direct statement. Many people like to believe this because they ASSUME that praying and prophesying are two conditions instead of seeing them as mere examples. * Praying and prophesying were meant to be viewed as examples, not conditions… Now I can understand how someone can mistakenly conclude praying and prophesying as conditions in verse 5, on the surface, but once you read the rest of the verses in context one cannot reach that conclusion. If they were meant to be conditions then why would Paul say in verse 7… “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.” If the reason for men not to cover their heads in this verse is because he is the “image and glory of God,” then why assume Paul was saying that there were only TWO conditions in verse 4? Wouldn’t 7 override any supposed conditions? Shouldn’t that make you question that perhaps Paul was just giving a couple of examples? But let’s continue. Verses 8 and 9 give us another understanding that Paul must have been referring to praying and prophesying as examples because he adds the order of creation into the mix. “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.” If Paul states that the creation order has something to do with the reason as to why women ought to cover (in long hair) and men to be uncovered (aka have short hair) then we can conclude that this doctrine must be bound in NATURE. That is to say that it must have taken place since the creation of Adam and Eve and BEFORE the manufacturing of veils or hats, and BEFORE the creation of churches, which is another reason why hair easily fits the mold. This is confirmed when reading verses 13 and 14 when Paul asks you to make an observational judgment that if it is comely (aka pleasant looking) for a woman to pray uncovered (in short hair) and that even NATURE teaches us that a man with long hair is shameful. Why would Paul ask you to think that something as unnatural as a woman without a hat would look off and then say something as natural as long hair would look off on a man? Paul was saying that not being covered in long hair especially while praying looks uncomely and in the same breath he continues and says men with long hair also looks naturally wrong. * So Is the Covering Long Hair or a Veil? ….. If we examine all the verses from verses 4 to 15 without bias, we should at least agree that at certain points the verses are referring to physical heads and hair. Now some have tried to argue that the covering is somehow Jesus or men (some erroneously add husband here as well). But since the passage in 1st Corinthians 11 already states that the man or Jesus are already referred to as the heads one should not mix things up and add that they are the covering especially when this word is referring to something else entirely, Plus it wouldn’t make sense if we were to replace the word covering, covered or uncovered with Jesus, man or husband. So, do the words “covered,” “cover,” “uncovered” and “covering” refer to long and/or short hair or some kind of foreign head covering? Some will even say all the above, but if we carefully examine verse 15 we would be getting a clearer picture of what was being referred to in the earlier verses when it mentions these words. “But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her FOR a covering." KJV So if the covering is long hair, then the words “covered” or “cover” (which are synonymous with “covering”) should be understood as long hair as well. If that’s true, then to be “uncovered” would mean “short hair.” If so, then we can get a better picture of verse 4 when it says that it is shameful or dishonorable for a man to pray or prophesy with his head “covered.” Note the similarity of verse 4 to verse 14 that’s because they are both referring to being covered in LONG hair.
@omarespinosa98267 ай бұрын
I'm a Christian man and I wish all Christian women would cover their hair like muslim and orthodox women do, I don't understand which is it so complicated for women to understand that they should all cover their hair when going to the temple ✝️
@josmith54192 ай бұрын
Please don’t compare Christian women to women who follow a satanic cult.
@Zacmax-ec4wm17 күн бұрын
Something inside me has been telling me to start veiling too Is it the Holy Spirit? Im only 17 😗 Should i start
@SisterinChristMel16 күн бұрын
Ask exactly Him - the Holy Spirit 🩵
@HolinessUntoTheLord.5 ай бұрын
~ what is your new Church like? 🙏🏾☺️
@SisterinChristMel5 ай бұрын
Bible based. KJV to be specific. Baptist. Filled with the Holy Spirit 🕊
@HolinessUntoTheLord.5 ай бұрын
@@SisterinChristMel Ooh I was gonna say it sounds like a goood one since there was a lady covering her head there 🙌🏾☺️ ~ how does it compare to your previous Church (if u don’t mind me asking), are there others ur age there?
@HolinessUntoTheLord.5 ай бұрын
@@SisterinChristMel I have been looking for one similar (for agggesss) but still have not yet found in my area 🙏🏾😞🇬🇧
@SisterinChristMel5 ай бұрын
She was the only one so she stood out 🥹 As for my previous and this one, they don’t compare. I would not compare them at all, both are complete opposites. And yes, there are many youths my age, younger and older. Youths full of zeal, so beautiful to witness 🥹🕊God is so good
@SweetBrownGirl10 күн бұрын
How do you keep it from slipping?
@SisterinChristMel10 күн бұрын
Wig clips from Amazon :) www.amazon.ca/shop/sisterinchristmel
@maryannharold85385 ай бұрын
Can i take it off when im working out and just put it back on after?
@SisterinChristMel5 ай бұрын
I only put it during church service (I take it off in between). Read 1 Cor. 11 :)
@maryannharold85385 ай бұрын
@@SisterinChristMel Thank you, and yes I agree that we should cover our heads. I just wanted to make sure I'm doing the right thing that's all.
@SisterinChristMel5 ай бұрын
@@maryannharold8538 prayer always works too if you haven’t done that already 🥰
@maryannharold85385 ай бұрын
@@SisterinChristMel oh yes I always pray, and I have to because there's so many spiritual attacks happening right now we have to pray. Sometimes God uses people to inform others on what they should be doing.
@Moonhart448 ай бұрын
Uh that’s barely covering I hope this is click bait for comments
@SisterinChristMel8 ай бұрын
It’s a HEADcovering not a HAIRcovering. It covers perfectly :)
@Theprincessinyellow7 ай бұрын
It is not to cover the hair for modesty, it is a symbol of a spiritual reality.
@SisterinChristMel7 ай бұрын
@@Theprincessinyellow symbol of authority rather :)
@Reading.with.milena3 ай бұрын
I startet veiling "part time", like on most days, but i dont wear it while woring out, most of the time home and on some days. Do you think thats okay? ❤
@SisterinChristMel3 ай бұрын
I don’t wear mine out, just in church. I think it’s important to consult God on your issue. Consistency is key :)
@liberty9784 Жыл бұрын
Where do you get your head coverings??
@SisterinChristMel Жыл бұрын
Thrift stores, hand-me-downs, Amazon. This one specifically is from Amazon. It came from a 6-pack.
@DollcakeLala10 ай бұрын
@@SisterinChristMeldo you mind sharing the name and/or link to purchase the pack? This shade of pink is so beautiful ☺️🩷
@SisterinChristMel10 ай бұрын
@@DollcakeLala Tongcloud 6pcs Women Soft Cotton... www.amazon.ca/dp/B09G9CJDTP?ref=ppx_pop_mob_ap_share
@_C_37378 ай бұрын
Those head coverings are so cute! But it looks like they don’t ship to the US 😢 trying to search for an alternative
@funnygaming26722 ай бұрын
any place that sells scarf including dollard tree store , ,shein has A LOT of choice just put in hijab and you will have all taste chiffon satin lace jersey ect all colors ,i prefer shein it cheaper and they have the same scarf/veil then amazon at better price with a bigger selection it all from the same place china anyway
@AliAli-bh4mr Жыл бұрын
❤❤
@rosag73867 ай бұрын
Excuse me where u got your head covering
@SisterinChristMel7 ай бұрын
Amazon!!!
@jonandlindseydoud72293 ай бұрын
Best place to get a pretty head covering?
@SisterinChristMel3 ай бұрын
Thrift store or Amazon or Etsy
@HarpazoReady2022Ай бұрын
1 Corinthians 11:3 gives us Gods order: God - Christ - Man - Woman. The next verses explain how a woman should cover her head- it doesn’t say WHAT to cover it with. Only that it should be when praying or prophesying. Verse 15 tells us HOW a woman can cover her head: “But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her; *for her hair is given to her for a covering.”* Oh, so scripture says her long HAIR is the covering- and it’s a glory from God. So the text is saying having long hair IS your outward display of submission. It NEVER says cover it with fabric to show submission to Gods order. So crystal clear that you have to be in either a cult or false religion to make it say fabric. Like these do: Islam, Catholicism, Hindus, Mennonites, Amish. Notice those are all works based religions and not by faith in Christ. I’m a Christian woman with long, pretty hair that God gave me as my covering when I pray. God knows by our heart that we submit to His order. THATS what this text tells us. Stop being legalistic. We’re not under Mosaic Law. We’re under Christs Grace. Let your long hair show Gods Glory to you♥️
@barbaramendicino7345Ай бұрын
For her hair is given to her for a covering...means for it to be covered. It also says in the bible that if she is not covering her head then she might as well shave..it also says in the bible that we should cover because all holy things are covered.
@HarpazoReady2022Ай бұрын
@@barbaramendicino7345 Her head IS covered- by her hair. It means what it says: *the hair IS the covering.* It doesn’t say the fabric is the covering or the cloth is the covering. The scripture wording says *hair.* And the original Greek uses the word *tresses* which is hair. But you can wear a veil if you want to. It won’t hurt anything. God goes by our heart. That’s why He says He will write it on our heart. The Abarim Greek says “her hair is given INSTEAD of cloth.” We go by what the verses say. Not what we want it to say.
@ahbilkhan6064 ай бұрын
She really said changed church
@marias65833 ай бұрын
So? What do you mean
@ahbilkhan6063 ай бұрын
@@marias6583As in the fact that each church is different - Should all churches feel the same 😂
@marias65833 ай бұрын
@@ahbilkhan606 why would they all be the same? People are different, we are not clones
@Vintage_my_retro_life6 ай бұрын
👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
@salmarivera12044 ай бұрын
can i have a link to the veil please
@SisterinChristMel4 ай бұрын
a.co/d/9oRxqep :)
@Gigglypuffx32 ай бұрын
Im catholic some woman till this day still wear it
@_.tarora12 ай бұрын
🩵
@Shadowbannddiscourse4 ай бұрын
I see this with Ethiopian women at my church. Are you orthodox just curious
@SisterinChristMel4 ай бұрын
Not orthodox:)
@Shadowbannddiscourse4 ай бұрын
@@SisterinChristMel interesting. To see non orthodox women take on this practice glory to the Most High either way pray for me 🙏🏾☦️🕊🔥🦋
@SisterinChristMel4 ай бұрын
Prayed 🫶🏽
@Shadowbannddiscourse4 ай бұрын
@@SisterinChristMel right on sista
@tothemoon9069Ай бұрын
Well its says us the bible that women needs to cover there head jf they dont there head may be shaved i dont know why everyone targets hijabs even when the same thing in the bible
@robertmiller812Ай бұрын
I would like to add my two cents here after reading this discussion. First of all I believe we should follow the teaching in 1st Corinthians 11. The main problem here is the misunderstanding of 1st Corinthians 11 altogether. I also have made an intense study of this passage, and the obvious conclusion is that Paul was referring to long hair being the covering. The first thing one should take notice is the lack of wording required to conclude that a veil is being referred to here. The word veil or cloth is not in the text if we read from the King James version. If you read from the “modern” versions then you might get that view but not from the Textus Receptus. I would like for you to reread the verses that allegedly refer to a veil which is 4-7 and 13. In those verses we read the words, cover, uncovered and not covered. According to scholars these are used as adverbs. Like if you were to say I am going to cover my feet. No one should be thinking of a veil just the action of being covered. What is missing in these verses are nouns that would prove the idea of veils. Since we should not be assuming anything we should be asking the question what is the thing that a woman should be covered WITH based on the passage ALONE? So if you do the math you would find that Paul refers to hair directly 3 times and then indirectly 4 times with the words shorn and shaven. So if there is no noun for the word veil or cloth yet there are 7 instances of idea of hair, then what are we to conclude? That Paul is referring to hair whether it be short or long. But the counterargument would be that Paul is allegedly telling women to put something on. But that is not exactly true it says a woman should be covered, but he is referring to long hair based on the surrounding verses. But what about that a woman ought to be covered when praying or prophesying? The assumption is a that Paul was referring to only two instances which is not true he was merely giving us two examples. This also applies to men about being uncovered. Evidence of this is written in the forgoing verses. Paul writes that men ought not to cover because he is the image and glory of God. And then Paul goes into how woman was made for man and is the glory of the man. So it would seem that man shouldn’t be covered at any time if he is the glory and image of God. Paul also mentions that the mere observation of a praying woman should make us note how uncomely (unappealing in appearance) for a woman to be uncovered. Paul states this in a way that it should be obvious to anyone that she looks off in verse 13. He does this again in verse 14 about how shameful it looks if a man has long hair. He says it this way… 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? KJV So this judgement that we should make is exclusively based on observation of an “uncovered” woman as well as a long haired man. Two consecutive questions both appealing to something innate or within us. Paul is in essence saying that it should be obvious to see that something is wrong or off. So how is it that for the women we are somehow to know within us that a woman would be unappealing in appearance without a manufactured veil? That does not seem logical especially since the word veil is never mentioned. Unless that is not what Paul is meaning but rather that if the woman was not covered in long hair (meaning her hair is short) doing something holy or godly LIKE praying or prophesying. I think most people can relate that looking at a woman with short hair does have an unappealing appearance. It naturally provokes head turns. And if there was any question Paul flat out states what he was talking about in verse 15. So the facts are that there no nouns to use as evidence of a veil. There is evidence that Paul was using praying and prophesying as examples. Paul appeals to nature and something innate within us to judge that being uncovered or covered (meaning having short hair or long hair) should be obvious to all. So this cannot make sense with a manufactured veil.
@angellicat.n.g23822 ай бұрын
So according to you woman that not head covering is unholy and unpure.
@FA-God-s-Words-Matter2 ай бұрын
If we follow those who subscribe to the doctrine of women wearing veils, then it can be argued that the most often cited verse is 1st Corinth. 11:5, which states: “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.” According to many of those who believe women ought to wear veils this verse supposedly implies that a woman’s uncovered head is a woman who does not wear a veil. Such a woman is either dishonoring God, their own physical head or her husband for failing to wear it which implies that they are in disobedience. Some have gone so far as to say it is a sin. Another assumption is that the woman being referred to already has long hair and since they conclude that the covering is a veil then it must be referring to an “additional” covering otherwise it would clash with verse 15 stating that God gave women long hair for a covering. Another conclusion is that women ought to be covered ONLY when praying and prophesying and for men to be uncovered, which would make it seem as though it were something that can be placed on or taken off like a veil. You’ve probably noticed by now it takes several assumptions to reach the conclusion that women ought to wear a foreign object on their heads, despite the lack of evidence. * Does the Bible really give a clear command that women should wear a veil? The first thing that everyone must understand when talking about this topic is that it DOES NOT say the word “veil” or “cloth” or any other physical headwear, as far as the KJV is concerned. It surely mentions that the woman’s head should be covered, and no one disputes this, but it does not say that it should be covered with a veil, a shawl, a bonnet, a cap, or any other specific headwear. The verses in question within 1st Corinthians 11 mention the words, cover, covered, uncovered, and covering, but that does not mean we can translate this to mean specifically a veil, a shawl, a bonnet, a cap, or anything else similar. In fact, it would seem more like an adverb rather than a noun. Nevertheless, the word “cover” is unfortunately interpreted by head covering promoters to mean a veil above all other types of headwear, even if there is no evidence to prove that beyond a shadow of a doubt. To do so would mean that one is trying to read more into the verse than what is stated and is not truly seeking an exegesis of the Scriptures. Some have claimed that they are referring to a physical synthetic head covering because the Scriptures seem to indicate that there are two exclusive conditions to wear one and that is when a woman is either praying and/or prophesying. But does this interpretation stand up to logic? If we were to believe that under certain conditions a woman ought to wear a physical head covering, then it stands to reason that under OTHER conditions a woman should be able NOT to wear one. For example, if you are going to argue that a woman ought to wear a veil because the Bible claims there are two conditions, then it is logical to presume that any other condition would ALLOW them to be without one, like speaking in tongues, interpreting tongues, healing the sick, casting out devils, etc. Now if a head covering promoter should claim that there are MORE conditions, then they admit that there aren’t really “two” conditions thereby nullifying the two-condition argument. The reasoning behind why the “two-condition” argument is important for veil promoters is because if these words were actual conditions, then it would seem as though the covering were something that can be placed on or taken off. So even though it does not literally or EXPLICITLY say anything about putting on or taking off a veil. Veil promotors form this belief based on what they believe to be IMPLIED and not by a direct statement. Many people like to believe this because they ASSUME that praying and prophesying are two conditions instead of seeing them as mere examples. * Praying and prophesying were meant to be viewed as examples, not conditions… Now I can understand how someone can mistakenly conclude praying and prophesying as conditions in verse 5, on the surface, but once you read the rest of the verses in context one cannot reach that conclusion. If they were meant to be conditions then why would Paul say in verse 7… “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.” If the reason for men not to cover their heads in this verse is because he is the “image and glory of God,” then why assume Paul was saying that there were only TWO conditions in verse 4? Wouldn’t 7 override any supposed conditions? Shouldn’t that make you question that perhaps Paul was just giving a couple of examples? But let’s continue. Verses 8 and 9 give us another understanding that Paul must have been referring to praying and prophesying as examples because he adds the order of creation into the mix. “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.” If Paul states that the creation order has something to do with the reason as to why women ought to cover (in long hair) and men to be uncovered (aka have short hair) then we can conclude that this doctrine must be bound in NATURE. That is to say that it must have taken place since the creation of Adam and Eve and BEFORE the manufacturing of veils or hats, and BEFORE the creation of churches, which is another reason why hair easily fits the mold. This is confirmed when reading verses 13 and 14 when Paul asks you to make an observational judgment that if it is comely (aka pleasant looking) for a woman to pray uncovered (in short hair) and that even NATURE teaches us that a man with long hair is shameful. Why would Paul ask you to think that something as unnatural as a woman without a hat would look off and then say something as natural as long hair would look off on a man? Paul was saying that not being covered in long hair especially while praying looks uncomely and in the same breath he continues and says men with long hair also looks naturally wrong. * So Is the Covering Long Hair or a Veil? ….. If we examine all the verses from verses 4 to 15 without bias, we should at least agree that at certain points the verses are referring to physical heads and hair. Now some have tried to argue that the covering is somehow Jesus or men (some erroneously add husband here as well). But since the passage in 1st Corinthians 11 already states that the man or Jesus are already referred to as the heads one should not mix things up and add that they are the covering especially when this word is referring to something else entirely, Plus it wouldn’t make sense if we were to replace the word covering, covered or uncovered with Jesus, man or husband. So, do the words “covered,” “cover,” “uncovered” and “covering” refer to long and/or short hair or some kind of foreign head covering? Some will even say all the above, but if we carefully examine verse 15 we would be getting a clearer picture of what was being referred to in the earlier verses when it mentions these words. “But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her FOR a covering." KJV So if the covering is long hair, then the words “covered” or “cover” (which are synonymous with “covering”) should be understood as long hair as well. If that’s true, then to be “uncovered” would mean “short hair.” If so, then we can get a better picture of verse 4 when it says that it is shameful or dishonorable for a man to pray or prophesy with his head “covered.” Note the similarity of verse 4 to verse 14 that’s because they are both referring to being covered in LONG hair.
@definitelynothaska2 ай бұрын
it isn’t even covering most of ur hair..
@lianaarnwine17099 ай бұрын
This does not make you a daughter of TMH.....read and study scripture not man made culture.
@SisterinChristMel9 ай бұрын
Don’t fret, neighbour. I’ve received Him 🥰
@melissabrown39769 ай бұрын
Head covering is biblical. Read 1 Cor 11:1-16.
@godman90748 ай бұрын
She has read and studied the bible. That's why she is wearing a head covering. You need to read and study the scriptures.
@godman90748 ай бұрын
@@melissabrown3976💯 correct
@angellicat.n.g23822 ай бұрын
😢myself is patriarc's victim. So scary if you live in my country.
@lewis43587 ай бұрын
actually according to the scriptures KJV Bible it's not the woman decision the husband decides if his wife wears a head covering also a cloth would be a secondary head covering because long hair on a woman is the natural covering according to the scriptures so the decision is entirely up to the husband if his wife wears a Vail as a Christian man myself i personally would instruct my wife don't wear a vail because i don't want my Christain wife looking like a Muslim now other Christain men they can say wear one and their wife should obey the husband
@vv-ec1nh7 ай бұрын
Hello, can you quote the scripture you are refering to please?
@lewis43587 ай бұрын
@@vv-ec1nh I would rather you watch this video of a ordained preacher showing verse by verse this subject so on KZfaq watch this video entitled should a woman wear a veil ? By Robert Breaker
@jesusmorales62147 ай бұрын
Why don't you learn about early Christianity? That is how I left the evangelical pentacostal church and became roman catholic.
@SisterinChristMel7 ай бұрын
Having a relationship with Jesus is not about denominations. I had an exodus from Roman Catholicism and I no longer want to be a part of it. As long as Jesus is in my heart, that’s all that matters. I’m saved and I’m assured of it 🥰🫶🏽
@jesusmorales62147 ай бұрын
@@SisterinChristMel Early christians believed in the Eucharist and baptized babies, let's not ignore the Intercession of saints. It's better to believe the church fathers than to listen to a modern century man..
@SisterinChristMel7 ай бұрын
@@jesusmorales6214 brave of you to assume what I believe in. Paedobaptism is not a biblical concept. An infant cannot confess that Jesus is Lord. We are sinners turned to saints, we can use intercession for each other when need be. See John’s 1st epistle. It’s better to read what’s written in the Bible and do your due diligence and rely on the Holy Spirit than to put your trust in other faillible humans beings such as ourselves. 1 Timothy 2:5 - “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;” We all have to answer to Christ one day. Thank you for your input and time nonetheless 🥰 nothing but godly love on my end.
@jesusmorales62147 ай бұрын
@@SisterinChristMel You have to study early Christianity to understand the Bible. Your thinking is not the holy spirit. You cannot be a follower of Christ if you do not follow the original teachings. Just like the Jews circumcised their babies. Christians baptized their babies too and this has been happening for over millennium. Remember that when the Bible was compiled by the Catholic Church in the 300's. And martin luther remove those book. He even wanted to remove the book of revelation and in the book of revelation. It mentions the intercession of saints.
@jesusmorales62147 ай бұрын
@@SisterinChristMel If you study the history of the veil In christianity, You'd understand that it was the catholics who wore them.
@smokyquartz581715 күн бұрын
You come off as very false.
@SisterinChristMel14 күн бұрын
That’s nice and all but with all due respect, there was nothing edifying about that comment. Go in peace :)
@idamarialeal33836 ай бұрын
The bible also talks about make-up. This is not right.