Get Nebula using my link for 40% off an annual subscription: go.nebula.tv/religionforbreakfast Watch The Getaway here!: nebula.tv/videos/getaway-the-snitch-or-snitch?ref=religionforbreakfast
@RobespierreThePoof
Ай бұрын
Oh man. This topic. Good luck with the comments. Sometimes, I really wish religious studies scholars would just come out and say very directly, "This isn't complex. Paul is using numerous logical fallacies and should not be read, therefore, as a reliable source of wisdom, much less anything resembling religious or moral law." You came oh-so-close to saying so. "Argument from nature" "This passage is 'complex' 'fractured' etc..." (quoting other scholars) But not all listeners understand the meaning or subtext of those statements. Let's be honest. Paul is full of misogyny and has "interesting" thoughts of the submission of slaves to their masters. He also has a totally unhinged reaction to those early Christians who continued the rite of circumcision, telling them to castrate themselves. At a certain point, you have to question why anyone is still taking his writings seriously as anything OTHER than a historical primary source for research into the lives of early Christians.
@Theggman83
Ай бұрын
Dude.. verse 16 says "But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God." ... There's the answer.
@ShonMardani
Ай бұрын
If a woman covers her head it means she is not available, if a man covers his head it means he is submissive to power. Pray is " پول بده - pool-bede " means "Give Me Money" which was a normal business transactions and compensation for work, but homeless and poor turned it into begging for money. If a woman pray (ask for money) without head covering it could mean that she is available and needs money.
@edelgyn2699
Ай бұрын
The content on Nebula looks great, but it's not free. Let's face it, Nebula is owned by people who use it as a means of making money - it's a market place! Offering me 40% off something still means you're expecting me to pay to view your content. The advantage of YT is that people on low incomes are able to enjoy free access to a wide variety of educational content and communicate with people all over the world. Be honest, you're just another person looking to earn income from video content...
@edelgyn2699
Ай бұрын
@@Theggman83 Yeah, he just kept repeating the same concepts to pad out a video around 25 minutes, I doubt he's genuinely interested in discussing the subject matter... 🤷🏽♂
@danielmanwiller9158
Ай бұрын
“Now to be clear, Paul is not being clear” 👌😂
@OceanusHelios
Ай бұрын
"Now to be clear, Paul wasn't being the Fashion Police here, excpet he was just being the Fashion Police here."
@NotIdefix
Ай бұрын
Christianity would be much better if Paul was never considered a "Christian"
@Sxcheschka
Ай бұрын
@@NotIdefix Paul was not a nice person.
@exaucemayunga22
Ай бұрын
@@NotIdefix Paul single handedly shaped Christianity
@johnmcnally7812
Ай бұрын
@@exaucemayunga22 For the worse.
@drhall343
Ай бұрын
Does the Bible command women to wear veils? -Me before the video: I'm not sure. -Me after the video: I'm still not sure, but in a more informed way.
@overloookable
Ай бұрын
This is why I consider learning to be substance abuse
@GizzyDillespee
Ай бұрын
Many great tragedies were catalyzed by informed confusion
@j3suis1337
Ай бұрын
@@overloookable It's addictive too...
@Talon19
Ай бұрын
I’m more concerned with what JESUS commanded than what “the Bible says”. After all, Jesus fulfilled and completed the Law. So while the Law is useful for historical reference, it in no way guides people to live according to Jesus’ teachings or prevent or ensure salvation.
@wes4736
Ай бұрын
@@Talon19- But this isn't just some work of the Moseic Law that's been arbitrarily clung to over the millennia. This was a nearly universal practice in some way, shape, or form until the 1960s. From the traditional veil, to the translucent Mantilla, to bonnets, and Easter Hats. The only reason why this seems so confusing now is because almost everyone in the developed world chose to abandon it.
@EricGoebelbecker
Ай бұрын
"Hair style theorists base their arguments on a few strands of evidence." I see what you did there.
@VJMorph
Ай бұрын
LOL came to the comments just to say that Hahaha
@Volundur9567
Ай бұрын
They really need to comb through a lot of information to get to the root of this
@boomjykeo2
Ай бұрын
It’s really important to separate the truth from the lice
@GoodLordMeBored
Ай бұрын
I too immediately noticed him weave that in. Well done!
@isaiah3872
Ай бұрын
This entire thread was witty 😂😂
@MogalyBogal
Ай бұрын
Paul would be gutted to find out everyone pictures Jesus with long hair now
@Maxinestabile
Ай бұрын
I think Paul would be gutted if he heard any of Jesus opinions on anything since most of what he said does not reflect what Jesus said at all
@egonomics352
Ай бұрын
@@Maxinestabilewrong
@justinjozokos1699
Ай бұрын
@@Maxinestabile Amen. That wasn’t Jesus he met out in the wilderness on the road to Damascus….
@Maxinestabile
Ай бұрын
@@egonomics352 thank you for your in-depth response. All the evidence for your claims that you gave was really well researched. I’m surprised someone could know so much about theology.
@Maxinestabile
Ай бұрын
@@justinjozokos1699 if you’re being serious are you Christian because if you’re a Christian who doesn’t believe in Paul as a prophet then I actually am very curious to hear your opinions on Christianity if you’re ok with having a discussion
@TJ-vh2ps
Ай бұрын
"Because of the Angels" is my new favorite answer to any question
@progidy7
Ай бұрын
Because of the angelic implications...
@modusoperandiofsatan
27 күн бұрын
@@progidy7 Because of my angel a$$...
@saniainez
22 күн бұрын
1+1? _Because of the angels_
@Carewolf
12 күн бұрын
i love he views the angels as sexual predators.
@Carewolf
12 күн бұрын
Angles are then basically the invisible man from The Boys.
@LiShuBen
Ай бұрын
In African American churches, it’s very common for older women to wear hats or head coverings.
@justchilling704
Ай бұрын
True but we don’t view it as dogma
@redhot2976
Ай бұрын
@@justchilling704?
@exaucemayunga22
Ай бұрын
Yeah that's because they're old and used to wearing hats. It's not for religious reasons
@legodavid9260
Ай бұрын
In India head coverings are still very common in Churches.
@justchilling704
Ай бұрын
@@redhot2976 I’m saying in Black churches women don’t have to wear hats.
@duncanluciak5516
Ай бұрын
Protect yourself from the sun, folks.
@joogies
Ай бұрын
literally
@jasonbell9212
Ай бұрын
And The Son
@manfredconnor3194
Ай бұрын
@@jasonbell9212 Nice one!
@TwisterTornado
Ай бұрын
@@jasonbell9212 No, I don't have a problem with the guy who said "cast the first stone".
@battyboio
Ай бұрын
Real
@ryanmunro4438
Ай бұрын
A couple interesting side points: •Many liturgical traditions (Catholic, Orthodox, Lutheran etc.) still believe angels are present in worship. •Paul furthers his argument saying that if anyone wants to argue about veiling, they shouldn’t because all churches had this practice at the time •Many women in churches only stopped wearing veils (or hats in some Protestant churches) in the 1960s, around the time the National Organization for Women organized a veil burning.
@Nusrich_2006
Ай бұрын
Yep. Even in the Church of England, seeing women wear hats in church - even small ones, like fascinators - was pretty common, as my grandmother explained to me. It surprises me that it did just vanish; not sure where I stand on the issue, but holding fast to St. Paul’s Letter is probably the best thing to do.
@charlesiragui2473
Ай бұрын
And this tradition of hats in church was also part of secular society's conventions. Men, in Western nations, were supposed to remove their hats when entering a building/home, while women could keep wearing them. It was considered rude for a man to even speak to a woman outdoors with his hat not at least having been lifted and indoors at all.
@davidhowe6905
Ай бұрын
@@charlesiragui2473 (UK) Reminds me of my great uncle Bill (born 1888), while on a car journey (c.1970), raising his hat when stopping to ask directions from a lady. I only wear a hat for warmth or protection from the Sun, but still feel the urge to remove it when entering a building.
@pansepot1490
Ай бұрын
@@davidhowe6905 gosh I wish all those KZitemrs who film themselves indoors wearing baseball caps (often backward), beanies, cowboy hats, etc. felt the same urge. 😂 Bald guys get a pass but those with hair don’t need warmth or protection from the sun indoors. 😃
@JohnMinehan-lx9ts
Ай бұрын
@@davidhowe6905 Unless you are carrying a weapon . . . .
@yrobtsvt
Ай бұрын
I'm a religious scholar specializing in another time and place and this video really gives so much food for thought. There is so much cultural context that goes unspoken when we read religious texts. Veiling might be hard for Paul to articulate but it would have been very visible and meaningful inside an early Christian church, and we have to look to gentile Roman culture to understand it.
@TheWorldTeacher
Ай бұрын
In the towns and cities of India, one can see many STRAY COWS wandering around, displaying their teats. Similarly, in the Western cities, one can see women wandering the dangerous streets alone, displaying their bosoms and other bodily parts. Such loose women are no better than STRAY COWS.
@backyardsounds
Ай бұрын
The first Christians were mostly Jewish though, not gentile.
@arkady0
Ай бұрын
@@backyardsoundsbut Paul appears to be a relatively Hellenized Jew writing to churches with both Jewish and Gentile members so it would be a mistake to ignore the Roman context.
@venerable9077
Ай бұрын
@backyardsounds Judea and Syria were heavily influenced by Hellenistic culture, this influence was visible in its intellectuals and aristocrats, it wouldn't be a stretch to argue many Jews were hellenized by the time the Romans conquered the region
@GizzyDillespee
Ай бұрын
Also, in addition to the stuff here and after 11:23 in the video... Paul was usually writing to a very specific community. And like a politician, he seemed to tailor his message to the specific audience, rather than expecting his various letters to be collected in a book for a general audience. That can be easy to forget.
@Inabin
Ай бұрын
When I was a kid, I went to church with a girl who believed that she was supposed to have her head covered, but was nervous about expressing that belief to the rest if the youth group, so she just wore a ball cap all the time.
@Iffysiffy1524
Ай бұрын
I'm both amazed and amused at this. A novel solution
@nanemoon9968
12 күн бұрын
That is really interesting, because going to church wearing a baseball cap would get you immediately kicked out in todays churches in Rome. So many conflicts just because of a piece of fabric
@hullie7529
4 күн бұрын
@@nanemoon9968An American friend of mine (Evangelical) went to visit a Catholic cathedral here and he entered with a baseball cap but he was just asked to remove it.
@aiocafea
Ай бұрын
as an orthodox christian, i am not surprised, but thank you so much for the explanation! i actually thought the rules were similar to islam but we just started ignoring them, i didn't know it was so tied to praying and prophesising thank you!
@partqfavor
Ай бұрын
@@aiocafea it's likely that the islamic use of veiling is related to similar concepts, not only as a religion inspired by judaism/eastern christianity but also as a religion from a region where it may be culturally common
@SnailShoes
Ай бұрын
@@partqfavorwasn't part of Islams to do with Umar (Mohammeds BFF) being a tad peculiar in a moment? Iirc, either Quran or Hadiths mention it. I imagine that along with historic Christian reason, that the practice stuck. In the Hadiths, I just went back to check. Umar requested Mohammed for a revelation to veil women. That wasn't done. Umar went and spied on Mohammeds wife when she went outside relieve herself. Made himself known to her. She tells Mohammed. Next day, Allah gave the revelation to Mohammed to cover women.
@vsedai
Ай бұрын
'Muslims did not practice veiling until they decided to follow the rich Christians.
@aiocafea
Ай бұрын
@@partqfavor yeah now it makes a lot of sense that they are offshoots of just similar cultural practices
@knate44
Ай бұрын
So I'm not a Quranic expert, there's just a lot of Muslims in my community, but from what I understand it's less that the Qur'an says women have to wear a veil or be punished it is more that it is seen as modest and pious to do so and is a way for a Muslim woman to show her faithfulness to Allah. It's only been a recent thing when men started jockeying for political power that "western" rulers started passing bans on the hijab and other coverings seeing them as outdated and degrading, and in retaliation "eastern" men started to force women to be covered to protect women and girls from the evil influences of the "west". Obviously there's more to that as cultural attitudes interact with religious practices, but generally speaking it is encouraged but not required for women to veil, and there definitely aren't different requirements for hijab vs chador vs burka or anything like that until you get to the interpretations part.
@DrVictorVasconcelos
Ай бұрын
People will generally not understand why scholars find passages to be incomprehensible when given in their language because the process of translation "fixes" the most grievous grammatical and structural problems based on the translator's opinion.
@bensrandomshows1482
Ай бұрын
What you said was incomprehensible
@BombaJead
Ай бұрын
@@bensrandomshows1482They are saying that the reason people don't find indecipherable passages as opposed to scholars is because the later read the texts in their original language while the former read translations where the translator already did the deciphering for them. At least that is my interpretation of what they wrote.
@LoudWaffle
Ай бұрын
@@bensrandomshows1482 Which part don't you understand? I found it very straightforward.
@CatBarefield
Ай бұрын
Agreed…
@tennicksalvarez9079
Ай бұрын
@@FleurPillager'no' ?
@MrARock001
Ай бұрын
Interviewer: "So, what would you say is a woman's sexiest feature?" First Century Roman Man: "Oh, top-of-head for sure. Some go for ankles, or wrists, all of which are obviously obscene, but for me, it's gotta be that top-of-head. Nothing gets my chariot charging like seeing where a woman's hair meets her scalp."
@MarkusAldawn
Ай бұрын
Be still my beating heart!
@hive_indicator318
Ай бұрын
I'm going to use "get my chariot charging" in conversation. If I remember
@lemonadecupcakes
Ай бұрын
*gasp* "hey! Quit, checking out my follicles!" But seriously.
@Passions5555
Ай бұрын
Hey! Eyes down here *gestures to my face"
@bretfisher7286
Ай бұрын
😂
@danielmalinen6337
Ай бұрын
In Finland, it has traditionally been interpreted that Paul meant long hair by the veil because hair is a human's natural veil. I don't know when or how this interpretation was arrived at, but it is certain that part of the cultural and historical context was lost when Christianity arrived in Finland and eventually the hair interpretation also became part of Finnish folk poetry. This interpretation became a matter of dispute during the 20th century, when short hairstyles were allowed for women and long hair for men, but the dispute ended with the fact that the length of hair can be decided according to each individual's discretion. However, this information is not something important and significant, but a fun piece of history nonetheless.
@tiryaclearsong421
Ай бұрын
I grew up in an Apostolic Pentecostal church in the US that believed a woman's covering is her uncut hair. We had a lot of bizarre traditions if hair had to be cut that seem straight out of Appalachian folk cultural practice. I find it interesting that different regions came up with a similar idea but possibly a different application.
@justchilling704
Ай бұрын
@@tiryaclearsong421Lol I’ve seen/heard of this.
@justchilling704
Ай бұрын
This is the view I was taught growing up.
@Kaede-Sasaki
Ай бұрын
If hair is the veil and men must pray with their heads uncovered, this would imply that males must shave their heads completely but may wear wigs when not praying. 😂 Having short hair for men is not good enough because it says head uncovered not shoulders or neck.
@Kaede-Sasaki
Ай бұрын
...
@ritawilbur6128
Ай бұрын
About interpretation: when I told World religions, I would tell my students, "I'm going to give you a one word text that would seem to be very simple and straightforward. Yet this text is also subject to differing interpretations." It was a stop sign. Full stop? Rolling stop? What is no one is around? What if you're making a right turn? Yes, EVERY text must be interpreted! Ah Paul; he was not a theologian, yet all this theology gets based on him. But what about the practice of Jewish men covering their heads in prayer? The bible does mandate the tallit. What was the practice in Paul's time? Were there Jews in the Corinthian church?
@ihatespam2
Ай бұрын
Paul was a crank who was anti Jewish establishment. His whole cult version of Jesus is counter to Jesus and jabs at Pharisees.
@mefistopheles
Ай бұрын
Has anyone else noticed the higher quality editing of this video? Love the new format for citing sources, the animation of the character cutout and the overall smoothness of the video! Good on you, Sir!❤
@Czaroslaw
Ай бұрын
I'm Roman Catholic. I was taught that men were obliged to not have any headwear on when in temple, but for women this rule does not exist and instead it is up to them if they want to cover their heads.
@JohnMinehan-lx9ts
Ай бұрын
There was a rule that women had to wear a hat prior to 1968.
@JohnMinehan-lx9ts
Ай бұрын
There was a rule that women had to wear a hat prior to 1968.
@Ggdivhjkjl
Ай бұрын
What you were taught is a submission to the pride of women who refused to let their expensive hairdos be ruined on Sundays.
@Scipio_Americanus
Ай бұрын
You went to a Roman Catholic temple?🤔
@wompa70
Ай бұрын
Whatever he was actually saying, I bet the Corinthians knew what he meant. You even see this with Shakespeare. Some of the meaning behind his writings are completely lost on modern audiences. References to color or people being like certain animals means something totally different today.
@KasumiRINA
Ай бұрын
It depends, "Even now, now, very now, an old black ram is tupping your white ewe." is pretty clear for example.
@kathleenwoods8416
Ай бұрын
That's a factor with any work of age or region, but that doesn't change the use of those historical facts in reference to any give subject.
@demos113
Ай бұрын
It was standard here in N. Ireland in the 70s and some of the Protestant groups still do it with hats instead. edit: this is in churches.
@lubumbashi6666
Ай бұрын
Both Protestant and Catholic Irish women wore headscarves into the 1980s, especially at mass. The veil was not worn like rhe Muslim Hijab, it was a scarf tied with a knot under the chin. Outside of mass it was optional but common enough, especially to protect a hair do during inclement weather.
@AntonOfTheWoods
Ай бұрын
I have long been fascinated with the bible but I never get more than a few pages in before giving up, in spite of how important it is for understanding the modern world. You make it not only bearable, you make understanding/interpreting it a pleasure. Thank you!
@RogersMgmtGroup
Ай бұрын
I suggest starting by reading Matthew, then John beginning to end. Start with the story of Jesus. The rest of the Bible puts Jesus in context, before and after his life and resurrection.
@KasumiRINA
Ай бұрын
@@RogersMgmtGroupGospels tell a really simple story, so do some Old Testament books as long as you don't get into those long chapters with just names.and numbers. Story of Exodus is my favorite, it's very straightforward and doesn't really need different interpretations... Jonas is my fav of.thw prophets dude just didn't want the job.
@katrinam6795
Ай бұрын
I read the bible several times and really enjoyed it. Except for the Leviticus records lol. Try seeing it as a historische document, as voices from the past.
@Laticia1990
Ай бұрын
I think most western christians haven't read the bible cover to cover. Don't feel bad. Leviticus and Numbers are a slough to get through. Ezekiel is a wild book though.
@Notreallyhereanymore
Ай бұрын
I was in estonia and went to an orthodox church and saw women wearing headscarves.
@Pavlos_Charalambous
5 күн бұрын
It's most a habit of older women nowadays, it's not mandatory
@PetroBeherha
Ай бұрын
Don't feel bad. Even Peter and the other Apostles thought Paul was being weird.
@justchilling704
Ай бұрын
He wasn’t, in all likelihood he’s quoting and responding to the Corinthians, this is why he refuted the women are subservient to men nonsense. Only reasons this is the case is bc Paul a freaking Pharisee scholar would be making big mistakes about what the Old Testament teaches.
@ihatespam2
Ай бұрын
Weird is being nice, he was a crank creating a cult
@andrewternet8370
Ай бұрын
@@justchilling704Lmao the Pharisees aren’t wrong. Christ literally says the Pharisees sit I. The seat of Moses and you should do what they say. People usually don’t understand that Paul, a self-proclaimed Pharisee, is making a Talmudic argument here. Wordplay is part of the process
@justchilling704
Ай бұрын
@@andrewternet8370 It’s clear you did not read or fully comprehend my reply.
@andrewternet8370
Ай бұрын
@@justchilling704 alr if you say so
@rachelefiore9974
Ай бұрын
Head covering while praying was common in Italy, especially in rural areas, my grandmother used to do it and many still do
@judyshoaf448
Ай бұрын
I am in my 70s and grew up Catholic. When I was young, a head covering was mandatory in church for females over a certain age, and men had to remove their hats in church (whether stopping in for a casual prayer or attending a service). I don't recall any such provisions having to do with praying at home (e.g. a "Family Rosary," which was a big deal in our parish for a few years. Even when we were little, my sister and I got a hat to wear to church for Easter, and I have always assumed that the "Easter Parade" reflects the idea that this was one day a year when all the Christians went to church. Gradually however, when I was in high school, it became the practice to place on the head a round piece of lace, covering only to top of the head (and not disturbing the bouffant hairdos of the day). This was especially convenient for schoolgirls who had chapel services because you could literally fold it up and put it in your pocket. However, we did not use them for prayer in the classrooms, so the sense was not "Veil yourself when you pray," but "veil yourself to honor the sacred premises." Anyway, I found all the pictures of Catholic women unveiled interesting since at that time we seemed to be the only denomination who covered our heads. As an adult, I taught in an orthodox Hebrew school one year, and found that unmarried women could show their hair, but married women had to keep it for their husbands' sight only (like the Roman who divorced his wife); however, the husbands lost out because the wives wore wigs in public. I am wondering whether Paul's combination of confusion and anxiety here doesn't have to do with the status of unmarried women. After all, he was promoting celibacy for Christians. Could he have been concerned to make sure that unmarried women used veils while praying?
@funwithrandomnesable
Ай бұрын
An interesting interpretation that I was taught in a religious studies class in university is that verses 3-10 are a quotation while verses 11-16 are a rebuttal; Paul is advocating *against* head covering for women. Theologian Lucy Peppiat talks more about this in her 2015 paper "Women and Worship at Corinth : Paul’s Rhetorical Arguments in 1 Corinthians". It's not a very popular interpretation but I find it very convincing, and it explains why the passage is so disjointed.
@justchilling704
Ай бұрын
This is correct we see the same thing with his response on women speaking.
@ihatespam2
Ай бұрын
Another great fail communicating the message of the Bible. Hardly omnipotent
@mattandkim17
Ай бұрын
Evangelicals: “We must not conform to cultural norms!” Also evangelicals: “This difficult Bible passage can easily be explained by appealing to ancient cultural norms.”
@michaelshelton5488
Ай бұрын
I just discovered Dan McLellan because of his interview on Esoterica and a day or two later, you quote him in a video. 😮
@EmmisonMike
Ай бұрын
For this I'd look at "Women in Worship in Corinth" by Lucy Peppiatt. She has a pretty modern and interesting assertion that this passage, like a handful of other Pauline texts, is in fact a response to veils rather than a whole-cloth argument, that Corinth is making a big deal about hair length and head coverings, and that this can tie to the general concern of the letter as a whole: the Corinthians have an inflated sense of their own holiness. If men are the head of women, as the father is the head of christ, we need to remember that both the father and christ are equally God. a straight-read of hierarchy here is essentially Arianism. We should also remember that Paul "shaved his head upon leaving) in acts 12, implying he took a vow until his departure. a normal Nazarite vow would mean refrain from cutting hair, so this could be him pointing out that it was fine when he had long hair, so what's the deal about connecting it to gender now? Finally in verse 16, we can read "we have no such custom" as "this isn't a problem with the other churches, why are you being so weird about this?" It's not a perfect explanation of Peppiatt's book, and i'm sure her book isn't as watertight as it seems, but especially in this context, i think it's beneficial to have a female theolgogian's perspective.
@professorhaystacks6606
Ай бұрын
I read "we have no such custom" meaning "no such custom for it being normal for women to shave their head." I also read that as implying "this is not for all time but is sensitive to custom."
@justchilling704
Ай бұрын
This is the view I hold too. Paul was a scholar and proud Jew, he knew the scriptures very well and would not say men having long hair is shameful as a consequence. Samson, and other nizerites weren’t seen as shameful neither was Absalom, in fact he seemed to be noted and his long curly hair praised. Further more Jesus may very well have had long hair.
@miguelatkinson
Ай бұрын
@@justchilling704 Paul wasn't a Jew
@user-bn6ht5eg4q
Ай бұрын
@@miguelatkinsonhe was
@carsonianthegreat4672
Ай бұрын
12:54 the “main man/head of the household” still has a head covering in the Catholic, Orthodox, and Nestorian Churches to this day. In the western Catholic Church, the priest can wear the zucchetto during parts of the Mass. The bishop will alternate between wearing his zucchetto and mitre at different points of the Mass. Eastern Catholic and Eastern Orthodox clergy will wear mitres/skufias/kamilavka during different parts of the Divine Liturgy. Nestorian Christians, Coptic Orthodox, and Chaldean/Coptic Catholics will have similar head garments worn by their priests/bishops that look even more like “veils.” It seems to me that the command against men wearing head coverings during prayer WAS to signify that the priest/bishop is the “head” of the congregation, because he was the only “dude with a hat.”
@rafiqjennings5262
Ай бұрын
If women have long hair and men cannot have long hair, then why is Jesus betrayed with long hair?
@marksieving7925
Ай бұрын
I assume you mean "portrayed." The depictions of Jesus with long hair came from later periods when long hair on men was fashionable. The earliest depictions of Jesus showed him with a typical Roman short hair style. Paul made the mistake that many still make of mistaking current local fashion for a natural, universal standard.
@rafiqjennings5262
Ай бұрын
@@marksieving7925 Yes, I meant “portrayed” and Thanks.
@jessethorns121
Ай бұрын
@@marksieving7925why would Jesus want to cut the hair that he causes to grow on himself
@carloswater7
Ай бұрын
I highly doubt Jesus had long hair.
@orneryoccultist9680
Ай бұрын
In the Islamic tradition, men should not have long hair, only women. Muhammad had hair down to his shoulders at times. It depends on the tradition’s definition of “long” when it comes to hair. Shoulder length hair seems long to me, but it wasn’t to Muhammad’s companions.
@fabricdragon
Ай бұрын
i think the "cover when praying or prophesying" goes well into "pray always" as well as the carry over from Judaic and other practices. (and of course in Judaism there are prayers that can be said for almost ANY action) i was a medieval reenactment person, and got used to the "you cover your hair all the time!" as a grown woman, you wore veils, or snoods, or hats or something as part of being dressed- it was... just "normal"
@charlesiragui2473
Ай бұрын
The practice of female head covering in many cultures seems to be related to demonstrating chastity, sexual modesty, warding off male sexual attention. However, women perhaps everywhere also make these head coverings beautiful, attracting attention, enhancing their attractiveness. Humans are complicated.
@OceanusHelios
Ай бұрын
It is more related to vanity. When you have long hair and the wind or the rain catches it, and you don''t have time to curl it, comb it, or brush it...which will leave loose hair everywhere....you put something on that hair to tame it. You think hairspray was everywhere in ancient Rome? Throughtout most cultures women have tended to wear their hair longer. Women also cover their hair because women are terrible to other women: picking on their hair, and the way they dress, what they do, and every single choide another woman makes. So, in the setting of a temple where everybody judges each other, it is just...well...easier.
@charlesiragui2473
Ай бұрын
@@OceanusHelios Interesting points! You make me think of Japanese movies where the women are planting rice and always wear scarves. Probably wrapping the hair is safer for work, not getting the hair snagged in anything.
@dehn6581
Ай бұрын
The earliest writings we have discuss them items demonstrating status, much like said in the video - married women in wealthy, powerful families were expected to veil, with some horrific laws having been in place for prostituted and enslaved women who were caught wearing veils including public beatings and hot pitch being poured over their heads. Whether they were made adornments to enhance beauty tends to be more on whether it's more the woman's own status being signified or the status or her family, and how much freedom is had - the more it signifies the status of another and the less freedom, the less likely they're made into adornments.
@jemts5586
25 күн бұрын
Well, people like pretty things, and most like to look good.
@tarttooth6022
Ай бұрын
Paul was just up in his feelings about balding.
@cultofdis
Ай бұрын
Wouldn't he prefer to mandate veils for men then? That way he could cover his bald spot and be like "it's not weird, God said to do this, you're weird for not doing it."
@rustomkanishka
Ай бұрын
Don't Jews also have a little skull cap? It kinda fits over the bald patch.
@Tymbus
Ай бұрын
When we visited churches in Spain in the Sixties, my mother put a head scarf on just out of respect (She was a Presbyterian)
@kokuinomusume
Ай бұрын
I'm Spanish, and after the Second Vatican Council the only mantillas you'll see here in mainstream churches* are the women in "manola" outfits during Holy Week processions and possibly the mother of the bride or groom in weddings. And some nuns, except few nuns wear wimples in normal life nowadays, either. * making space for a handful of traditionalists and some special events like royal weddings or papal ceremonies -- though lately queen Letizia has been bareheaded even when visiting the Pope.
@JoseGomez-n4k
11 күн бұрын
@@kokuinomusumeit’s such a shame. The mantilla is such a lovely garment. I would love if women continued to wear veils in church but it doesn’t have to be seen anymore as having to do with propriety but as a fashion
@jmariagarcia
Ай бұрын
“Few strands of evidence” 😂 nice.
@ivanos_95
Ай бұрын
The most strict, or the oldest tradition within Christianity, that is the Orthodox tradition, doesn't associate the hair-covering with sexuality at all, and enforces it only when a woman is participating in a sacred event, or entering a sacred place.
@JoseGomez-n4k
11 күн бұрын
Catholic is just as old as orthodox
@markandrzejak997
Ай бұрын
Paul is writing to all these communities so we only get a one-sided conversation. Are there any/many writings to Paul that were the cause of his responses?
@MathewAlden
Ай бұрын
Afaik they have all been lost to time.
@TheAltair716
Ай бұрын
This episode recalled memories from when I still attended Church (Catholic, Poland) as a child. I come from a small village in southern Poland, older Women always covered their hair when attending church. It's possible this tradition of covering hair survived in homogenis societies. Men also always remove their head covering when entering church, this still happens, not only in small villages but I think everywhere here in Poland.
@carsonianthegreat4672
Ай бұрын
Lots of young Catholic women in America veil. It’s usually the boomers that don’t.
@riteshyeddu9186
Ай бұрын
We aren't exactly homogenous but this happens in Indian churches too.
@cloneguy77
Ай бұрын
This is very interesting. When I was looking at this verse before my confirmation, my pastor argued that Paul was not arguing for head coverings for women, but instead, refuting this argument. When he says previously that women should wear head coverings, he justifies the argument on the basis that woman came from man, and is thus subordinated to man. But he then seems to refute this argument by saying ""nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. 12 For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God". Or, that if the argument for women's subordination to men (and head coverings) is based on Woman originating from man, this logic is contradicted by all men originating from (being born of) women. I was taught that this meant Paul was repeating an argument made by contemporaries but then arguing against it. I did not realize this was not the standard interpretation. I really enjoyed the video, thank you!
@Carlos-ln8fd
Ай бұрын
Yeah I remember attending Catholic mass in the US once and was surprised by how many young women used head coverings during prayer but took it off afterwards.
@jps0117
Ай бұрын
I never understood the obsession of religions with hair and headgear.
@iamdanieloliveira
Ай бұрын
Each group may rationalize it differently, but I believe this tendency comes from the fact that the first thing you see on a person is their face/head, so a distinct head gear/hair style/face painting is the quickest way to set one group of people apart from another. It's also not just religions that do that: militaries still have different head gears to differentiate between different regiments and between ranks, hats were used until recently as a way to signal your social class (top hat, bowler hat, fedora), etc.
@j0anbug
Ай бұрын
because the top of the head/hair is seen the part of the body closest to heaven.
@elchivo3770
Ай бұрын
Paul on head coverings: "If anyone is inclined to be contentious, we have no such practice, nor do the churches of God." - 1 Corinthians 11:16
@jps0117
Ай бұрын
@@iamdanieloliveira Good points. Thanks.
@ladycrowley1413
Ай бұрын
Well, Women's hair plays a big role in their femininity and their attractiveness, men being men always were possessive and didn't want anyone coveting their women. And since religions were created by men ( not Men ) it makes sense.
@CharlieEarthRoast
Ай бұрын
0:44 All you need to know is the reason not all Christian Women follow this rule is because they pick and choose which parts to follow, depending on what is convenient for them.
@CopticPrince-hh2yi
Ай бұрын
western christian women
@servnava6601
Ай бұрын
There's also the simple fact that this was 1 letter written to 1 community freaking with their own set of issues. Yes there was some circulation of these letters but it was not assured and if this was a very important mandate to Paul he would have repeated it more than 1 time. I have christian friends in Delhi, it is very important to them to dress modestly because every day they are surrounded by people that will judge them, possibly to the point of violence if they don't dress that way. My friends in Mumbai? Couldn't care less, that is not a danger in their culture and they can dress much less conservativly
@KasumiRINA
Ай бұрын
This. Every time someone quotes Paul out of context, I ask, WHO THIS EPISTLE TO? Now, are YOU a Corinthian/Roman/Ethesian? It's VERY clear Epistles to, say, Jews, have very different context to those sent to gentile churches and those differed between each other too.
@Kaede-Sasaki
Ай бұрын
@@KasumiRINA My name isn't Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John (particularly since these are all dudes). Does the Bible apply to me at all? 😂
@Kaede-Sasaki
Ай бұрын
..
@albertito77
Ай бұрын
We know from early church history that the Corinthians responded to this letter by... the women wearing actual head coverings/men not. All available evidence shows that this was a universal practice until second wave feminism
@flyingdutchman3755
Ай бұрын
@@Kaede-Sasaki Yes, it does. Those names refer to the books' authors name. They wrote those books about Jesus' life from their own perspectives. The books of 1-2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Romans, etc were letters written by Paul to respective cities' christians/churches to guide them and tackle different problems and challenges they faced. While the letters were written for specific purposes to each cities, they stll give important and significant teachings for all christians.
@samrobertson7535
Ай бұрын
It's interesting that veiling for women may have been a practice confined to the upper classes in the classical Mediterannean. The same was true for many parts of the Islamic world, particularly Central Asia. The wearing of the burqa -- or the paranja, as the variety worn in Turkestan is called -- was historically limited to upper-class urban women; veiling was comparatively rarer in rural areas. This comes down to economics really -- a full-body veil is an expensive article of clothing, especially when ornamented, that was likely unaffordable for the lower classes. Furthermore, upper-class women did not have to contribute as much labor to the household, particularly labor outside the home (going to the market, wage-earning, etc.), meaning that they didn't have to go through the cumbersome process of putting on the full veil as often in order to leave the home as often. The full-body veil may therefore have been a mark of distinction, showing that upper-class women had the luxury of wearing such a restrictive, intricate outfit.
@lovedbythesun
Ай бұрын
Ain't no woman came from a man's body. In the womb, we are virtually female until about 20-something days when the Y kicks in and turns males male. That's why men also have nipples. Female is the base form. Long hair is not degrading for men in any regard, in fact is cited as a signifier and prestige in many cultures.
@Scipio_Americanus
Ай бұрын
Thanks big girl🙄
@abeytagrl5161
9 күн бұрын
The fact that one should not add to or take away from the Torah (Deut 4:2) speaks to the fact that this is Paul’s opinion or advice suitable for a specific time and place.
@larrylouie
Ай бұрын
In the Philippines, some older women and laywomen still wears veils (belo) during masses, processions, and daily prayers...
@gyrrgibbs305
Ай бұрын
People had some interesting ideas about anatomy. I am inspired to look into this concept of hair storing fluids.
@LimeyLassen
Ай бұрын
The sexual transpiration hypothesis, I love it
@MossyMozart
Ай бұрын
As a small child I remember seeing Catholic women wearing handkerchiefs on their heads when going into the nearby church. I was always puzzled and hoped that they used clean ones.
@GoodLordMeBored
Ай бұрын
I am Catholic and from Southern India where culturally women use the end of their sari or a shawl to cover their heads during Mass, while attending church or religious gatherings and including prayer at home. I thought in the western world/US this was a same practice up until Vatican 2 but not sure.
@Infiniteemptiness
12 күн бұрын
The thing you missed is according to the Bible you being a woman is an inferior creature under man. You must obey everything man says, you don't have the right to criticize
@shawnregina9110
Ай бұрын
Paul is extremely clear. And most women did veil until recently.
@progidy7
Ай бұрын
Subsequent church fathers and doctors reiterated Paul's command to veil, calling it not small sin to disobey
@DragonKing101
Ай бұрын
@@progidy7 Except Paul quite literally never says that her 'head covered' even refers to a Veil. Although, I'll grant it does overall make a lot more sense than the hair being put into a specific way interpretation. With that being said, and as the video basically went over, the practice is ultimately far more based on "Modesty" for your elite wives to tell other Men off and to show her faithfulness to her Husband. In the case of Paul, he's doing it in a similar spirit by applying that modesty to wives in general when prophesizing and praising in the Church (Which seems to have something to do with the angels). With that being said, it's *ultimately* a Custom rather than a Law that Paul is giving (as he makes clear in the beginning of the passage and the end of the passage by straight up calling these customs), and the Churches now holding to other Customs. So, Paul's statement at best really only gets you to what a Christian Wife should do in that time period. Anyways, You probably want to best fit in with the customs of the wider church community. I suppose if a wife wanted to stay still in line with the core of Paul's statement, while still not liking the idea of wearing a veil, then she could do something else that still signifies her faithfulness to her Husband and her Modesty that could be accordance with the wider community of the church.
@DragonKing101
Ай бұрын
@@progidy7 And to your other comment about the last part of the passage somehow makes this a Universal commandment... He doesn't say that? His point is that there's a Universal *custom* for this in the broadest sense of the Church, not that his last point is that it's a Universal *Command.*
@progidy7
Ай бұрын
@@DragonKing101 "Except Paul quite literally never says 'head covered' even refers to a veil" Paul says "Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head, 5 but every wife who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, ..." If this is about hair, then every man needs to shave their head before going to church. Paul then immediately goes on to say "since it is the same as if her head were shaven." Being that this is a comparison, we know that Paul had previously NOT been talking about hair style but instead a covering. "it's *ultimately* a custom rather than a law ... end of the passage straight up calling these customs" you're leaving off the full ending: "we have no such practice, nor do the churches of God." If there is no Christian church that allows unveiled women, then it's a law. A Christian custom, but universal rather than local. Unless Paul only meant "no church of God within a few hundred kilometers".
@progidy7
Ай бұрын
@@DragonKing101 "And to your other comment" I concede, Paul was only talking universally with regards to Christianity, not regarding other religions 😑
@MelpyMelperson
Ай бұрын
Even as a little kid I was like "Paul is stupid. Samson had long hair and that was his strength.". Paula sexist. What's hard to understand
@Scipio_Americanus
Ай бұрын
Something that never happened
@ocaollaidhe
Ай бұрын
In Ireland in my experience (18), I went to a Catholic school and people would've considered it rude for a man not to remove a hat or headcovering when entering a church.
@donnadumare
Ай бұрын
And Jewish men have to wear caps, but women don't have to wear it. Go figure.
@TheRealWilliamWhite
Ай бұрын
In the US, the southern US especially, it's customary to remove your hat in any building. Nowadays it's not as much of a thing even in many churches.
@TwisterTornado
Ай бұрын
@@donnadumare Sometimes the women wear wigs.
@ocaollaidhe
Ай бұрын
@@TheRealWilliamWhite yeah same here, I think I would habitually remove my hat anytime going indoors
@jeanfalconer6377
Ай бұрын
19:35😊 such a straight faced pun!
@robertortiz-wilson1588
18 күн бұрын
Very clear and well done video by the way!
@nostalgic_808
Ай бұрын
🤍 Thank you for this information 🤍
@MinnieTricks
Ай бұрын
Was the practice of tonsure an outcome of Paul saying men in prayer should not have their head covered?
@emalee8366
Ай бұрын
I was just arguing with a friend of mine about the requirement of interpreting the texts as part of the process. He argued that the meaning is plain, and I'm complaining about nothing. Also, I love McClellan
@BrandanLee
Ай бұрын
The super power of Christianity is its ability to pick and choose your own interpretation like an all you can eat buffet. You can even pick and choose the love thy neighbor and do unto others right out, leaving only the hatred and brimstone.
@Nick19904
Ай бұрын
Hey Andrew, I just realized that I have a number of your books you display on your bookshelf. The More New Testament Apacrypha by Tony Burke, the Pseudepigrapha books by Charlesworth, and the Apocryphal New Testament by Elliott.
@Cotillion308
Ай бұрын
Religion and hats always give me a good laugh.
@AbdulKhader-786
Ай бұрын
Paul was the one who invented the doctrine that men should bare their heads. But the original teaching is for men to cover their head out of reverence to Heaven, especially when praying. This is why we Muslims cover our head, usually with a skullcap. Paul said men should bare their head as a sign of their glory, but Islam teaches that men should cover their head as a sign of respect and humility
@JoseGomez-n4k
11 күн бұрын
What do Muslims think about Paul then
@awalkthroughtorah6897
Ай бұрын
From a different standpoint: the passage lists the authority of God over man, and man in authority over his family/ wife as PROTECTION. So it could be a a simple as a woman needing the headship covering of a male family member if she is to pray or speak publicly. It is also warned by Paul that a woman should be quiet in church. However, when delved into, it is admonishing men to teach their wives at home so they don’t need to interrupt the meeting with questions. Men generally had more access to formal education than women did. However we also need to remember that Jesus chose common men as some of his disciples. So anyone can be called. Women in leadership in scripture include Judith, Deborah, and Pricilla. Pricilla is listed before her husband because she was the evangelist. As her headship covering, he was in ministry along side her as a team.
@GabrielEddy
Ай бұрын
….because of the angels….
@Wizzardofficialchannel
Ай бұрын
That is straightforward
@GabrielEddy
Ай бұрын
@@Wizzardofficialchannel Indeed.
@justayoutuber1906
18 күн бұрын
“Any time you see two groups of people who really hate each other, chances are good they're wearing different kind of hats. Keep an eye on that, it might be important. Personally I would never want to be a member of any group where you either have to wear a hat, or you can't wear a hat."” ― George Carlin
@Engelhafen
Ай бұрын
Paul, as a former Jew would not have seen covering the head as a ‘pagan vibe’ - Jews cover their head as a reminder of the presence of God
@stargatis
Ай бұрын
Well if the argument was “unusually fractured” isn’t that a clue that it was poorly added by later editors?
@MathewAlden
Ай бұрын
Fractured arguments can be poorly added by the original author too. It's not evidence either way. 🤷
@zbeer570
Ай бұрын
At 6:14 you put a Shulchan Aruch (Jewish legal text from the 1500s) behind a quotation from the Mishnah (second century CE). Funny mistake, but please be accurate to how you are displaying these texts in the future!
@drqwyxz3588
Ай бұрын
he is suspiciously cautious when he talks about Islam
@MrBasilion
Ай бұрын
The main thing is that head covering was a must for higher class women, who were a tiny minority. Most Roman people were slaves and laborers.
@jkang7265
Ай бұрын
13:45 Absolutely excellent photo of Sarah Ruden and her colleague haha
@user-ho8hw5dy2u
Ай бұрын
thank you for the youtube chapters in this video, they helped me to outline the different themes covered and arguments explained, but also were funny and amusing in some bits!
@hma237
Ай бұрын
But nature *doesn't* give women longer hair than men. Why on earth wouldn't Paul have realized that, since all babies have very short hair at first & then later it's cut on boys & men? Did Paul mean something else by 'nature gives'? What do scholars say about that? Why wasn't that essential point even mentioned?
@MathewAlden
Ай бұрын
I mean, don't men bald faster/more? Theology aside, men on average DO have less head-hair than women.
@bkucenski
Ай бұрын
The NRSUVE version makes it abundantly clear that the woman has authority over her head. As in, she can make her own decisions. Paul is not picking a side, he's telling the men to stop bossing women around because no church of God has any custom about what women should do with their head.
@Vivisectus
Ай бұрын
Odd, though. Paul says women should be silent in church in 1st Corinthians, but here they are told to wear a veil when praying and prophesying? Are they supposed to do that mutely?
@sapphireBunny
Ай бұрын
Paul pretty routinely slips in his own misogyny into his “advice” which tends to go against things shown prior in the bible and sometimes his own stuff. See the Deborah being one judges in the old testament and holding religious power over the chosen people of G*d, most being mentioned being men, BUT Paul says women shouldn’t have power over men in the church.
@wartgin
Ай бұрын
There are some theories that many times Paul is quoting from portions of the letters asking for his opinion on the issue and laying out the issues. According to this theory, that is why he seems to be giving opposite statements at times. He quotes the statement he thinks is problematic and then lays out his advice. The church to which he writes knows the contents of the letter they sent but we do not and there wasn't the same sort of punctuation marks or spacing to distinguish those portions at the time.
@user-iz8np3vv4i
Ай бұрын
There are different theories on that. Probably, maybe, possibly, wives were sitting on the other side of the room and asking their husbands what such and such meant while the speaker was speaking. Paul possibly was just stating a basic idea to keep things orderly.
@Vivisectus
Ай бұрын
@@user-iz8np3vv4i Heh the Bible accidentally incorporated the "first, some housekeeping notes" part of the speech and now there are all these Christians trying to work out how they should live based on it.
@susanwozniak6354
Ай бұрын
Many years ago, when Michael Wood presented his series on Troy, he made an off-hand remark about the wind and said how it must have wreaked havoc on Helen's complexion. That idea stuck with me for several years, despite the Trojan War not being close to the Biblical peoples in both terms of time and geography. Sometime later, another historian remarked that the Quran is more about being a Bedouin than about being a Muslim. As desert dwellers, the Bedouin women wore veils while the men wrapped up their hair in a keffiyeh and grew beards. Without water for frequent shampooing, covering the head was part of personal care. Much later, kitchen maids in Europe covered their heads to avoid smoky aromas. It would seem that cleanliness was the first reason to veil heads. That has nothing to do with men and covering, unless, the idea of a head covering could slip during a duel and cause a man to lose his life. That's pure speculation.
@LyleFrancisDelp
Ай бұрын
02:00. Wait....didn't Jesus have long hair. It's in all the portraits and on the Shroud. WTF?
@An_Egregore
2 сағат бұрын
Alt interp: Paul is not asking a rhetorical question in either the positive or negative. He's saying it's up to the audience. He goes on to explain That a woman's long hair is a natural veil... Which kinda falls in line with the "come as you are" theme.
@thewb8329
Ай бұрын
Before Vatican II head veils were required in Catholic Masses. Now only some conservative Catholic Churches require them but it is still optional. Just another example of how traditions religions have that had origins from what you discussed.
@wendyleeconnelly2939
Ай бұрын
Religions cannot be reduced to the content of their sacred texts. Fundamentalists do try, though.
@LyleFrancisDelp
Ай бұрын
Did Paul really even write this?
@aspitube2515
3 күн бұрын
I remember Paul wrote once that women shouldn’t have complicated hair styles, this could fit with the unveiled/unbound hair passage.
@jmariagarcia
Ай бұрын
And Paul was also responding to a cultural context. So that begs the question: when the context changes, does the response also change? And I personally think the answer has to be yes.
@eirrenia
Ай бұрын
Absolutely! There have been times and places where wearing shoes with red heels literally indicated your status as a s*x worker. Today if you were before a judge on charges of sexual misconduct and tried to use the defense “but your Honor, she was wearing red heels!”, not only would you get the book thrown at you, no one would have a clue what you’re talking about. How you dress always sends a message about you, whether it’s regarding status, culture, activities, values, religion, sexuality, politics, interests, etcetera. But what specific items of apparel (or lack thereof) actually _mean_ does not have a fixed value. There are certain scarf/hat styles I would love to wear (especially on bad hair days) but I won’t because it would not only be disrespectful in our current context, but would be a form of lying, of indicating something that just isn’t true.
@jmariagarcia
Ай бұрын
@@eirrenia great summary of basic cultural competency!!
@zacharycurrie3708
Ай бұрын
You didn't discuss the last verse of the section: if anyone is contentious, we have no such custom. That's usually the verse quoted to explain why head coverings are not mandatory.
@jennslifeinhuntingtonwv2678
Ай бұрын
I'm 61 years old and from West Virginia. I remember ladies wearing a doily on their head at church. 😂 so silly
@teehee4096
Ай бұрын
West Virginia... mountain mama! (Sorry, I had to 😂)
@jennslifeinhuntingtonwv2678
Ай бұрын
@teehee4096 it's okay lol
@OceanusHelios
Ай бұрын
And then go home and being vicious to their kids and everybody else around them as they gossipped about anything and everything?
@jennslifeinhuntingtonwv2678
Ай бұрын
@@OceanusHelios so true
@ShonMardani
Ай бұрын
If a woman covers her head it means she is not available for other men, if a man covers his head it means he is submissive to power. Pray is " پول بده - pool-bede " means "Give Me Money" which was a normal business transactions and compensation for work, but homeless and poor turned it into begging for money. If a woman pray (ask for money) without head covering it could mean that she is available and needs money.
@peterspoto5092
Ай бұрын
In my experience, most of the time when this passage is discussed among protestants, the "dress modesty" interpretation is what is followed.
@onbearfeet
Ай бұрын
Ah, the "every woman should dress like my mother" sermon. I know it well. (As a kid, I used to make a game out of figuring out when the speaker would have been a child and what women his mother's age would have been wearing at the time. It was always illuminating to hear a speaker who was a child in the 1950s insist that women should never wear pants while a speaker who was a child in the 1970s railed against women baring their midriffs.)
@jedbradshaw8073
Ай бұрын
13:38 Excellent squishy dog spotted
@robbuxton8438
Ай бұрын
Thank you sir for a very informative study of this topic
@Jennifer-cl1cl
Ай бұрын
Another thing to keep in mind about hair coverings is that shampoo didn't exist then. Covering your hair kept it cleaner.
@jedimmj11
Ай бұрын
Soap did exist
@Jennifer-cl1cl
Ай бұрын
@@jedimmj11 Greeks and Romans of this era are actually kinda famous for not using soap for personal cleaning. They used hot water, oil, and a strigil - a curved tool which was scraped across the skin to remove the film left behind by the oil. The hot water slightly emulsified the olive oil, so all of the dirt and dead skin would get suspended in the water/oil mix. And then the strigil would scrape the mix off your skin, and all the dirt and stuff went with it. The only problem is that you can't really strigil your scalp - too much hair. It's why for much of history women have braided and covered their hair - it helps to keep the scalp clean. and helps keep the hair near your scalp from getting sweaty.
@StraylightWintermute
Ай бұрын
@@jedimmj11 soap was not used to wash hair, just like I hope you don't wash your hair with bar soap today! It's way too drying for hair. Europeans didn't start developing shampoo until the British brought back the idea from India, where they used ingredients like soap nuts that have gentle saponins rather than harsh lye. Soap was used for clothing more than skin, because back then it would have been even more alkaline than nice soap is today.
@Jennifer-cl1cl
Ай бұрын
@@StraylightWintermute Lye-based soap on your scalp would be super painful for a lot of people. Scalp skin is thin and sensitive, and lye soap can cause chemical burns on skin if you leave it on too long.
@ShonMardani
Ай бұрын
You are correct, that is why they were shaving the slaves hair. If a woman covers her head it means she is not available for other men, if a man covers his head it means he is submissive to power. Pray is " پول بده - pool-bede " means "Give Me Money" which was a normal business transactions and compensation for work, but homeless and poor turned it into begging for money. If a woman pray (ask for money) without head covering it could mean that she is available and needs money.
@trikitrikitriki
Ай бұрын
In church, I was taught that Paul's main concern was in men being unveiled because Roman pagan men covered their heads when involved in religious activities. The women part was said to be about having long hair. So, a hybrid of two separate arguments.
@Inabin
Ай бұрын
I remember the church I grew up in held that it was a prohibition against men growing out their hair and women cutting it short. I remember this very vividly because when I started growing out my hair, they got really upset about it. Little did they know that I was a woman after all.
@mahatmarandy5977
Ай бұрын
There is a fairly commonly held hypothesis. That first and second Corinthians are actually composed of anywhere from 3 to 6 separate epistles that were edited together by the Corinthian church just for ease of handling them and copying them. Is it possible that Paul incoherence in this passage might be related to such an edit job? Like hypothetically, he addressed the subject in letter and then addressed it again in a slightly different way in a subsequent letter, and editor might try to put those two sections together in a way that comes across as confusing.
@SleepyPotterFan
Ай бұрын
It’s interesting how Roman polytheists praying capite velato received specific condemnation while other polytheist elements from philosophies to holidays were incorporated.
@nejkajaryba1710
Ай бұрын
I'm still wondering why his letters are the part of the New Testament lol
@johnssmith4005
Ай бұрын
LONG HAIR is the " Covering " of the woman
@matthewgrgaddie
Ай бұрын
If Paul is using a naturalist argument for head veils for women then I find this argument to be vary flimsy.
@zephlodwick1009
Ай бұрын
Especially since men can grow their hair long, and some hair will just grow outwards instead of falling down.
@Bethelaine1
Ай бұрын
In some animals, like lions, the male has long hair on their head while females have short hair. Paul also often says women should be silent in church, so when is it proper for them to prophesy?
@carsonianthegreat4672
Ай бұрын
It’s not a naturalist argument. It’s an argument from the natural law (which is, confusingly, not about the natural world, but rather teleology).
@ShonMardani
Ай бұрын
If a woman covers her head it means she is not available for other men, if a man covers his head it means he is submissive to power. Pray is " پول بده - pool-bede " means "Give Me Money" which was a normal business transactions and compensation for work, but homeless and poor turned it into begging for money. If a woman pray (ask for money) without head covering it could mean that she is available and needs money.
@lisaboban
Ай бұрын
I was a Christian for decades and it never occurred to me how much of my own experience, culture and interpretation I was bringing to the text. Through videos from you and other scholars I was able to slowly, painfully let go of those ideas and let the text speak for itself. It really is possible to teach an old dog new tricks!
@overgrowndweeb
Ай бұрын
I feel like Paul was very clear in his writing. The fact that modern people strongly disagree with his sexist belief does not make his words unclear or complicated - thats just copium.
@matthewmoser1284
Ай бұрын
I really appreciate the effort and work you put into this. And I want to preface my opinion by noting I'm not anywhere CLOSE to a Biblical scholar. However, I personally hold to the idea that Paul's PURPOSE as an early church leader is important to consider in all his writings. Paul himself has sometimes clarified that which comes from God, and that which comes from his own wisdom or advice. This is an important distinction because Paul is probably one of the BEST-placed individuals in his time to make rulings and judgements on "church law". Because Paul was an expert in both Roman AND Jewish law. And since Christianity at the time existed at the nexus of both Roman and Jewish law, Paul is AUTOMATICALLY the best candidate for a Christian leader. I mention this because we have to ask ourselves why it was so important for the early leader of the church to have these qualifications? And the answer to me seems to be that Paul was needed to allow the church to grow in its crucial early stages while the church was still protected. Yes, PROTECTED. Since the Roman legal position was that Christianity was a Jewish sect, and since Judaism was a legally protected religion at the time, Christianity was given a few decades of brief peace to grow and spread. This would have been far more difficult if the Roman's persecuted Christians straight out the gate. Paul's purpose as a church leader at this time, therefore, seems to be to hold back Roman ire for as long as possible while the church grows. In many of Paul's letters, Corinthians among them, he's admonishing different churches for their behavior. Paul makes a LOT of comments about the Corinthian churches behavior, and in particular their women. He not only comments on their hair and veils, but also comments on the pleats of their dresses and skirts, the immodesty of certain hair styles, and how much jewelry they're wearing. Now I like the idea that Paul was trying to make a setting where everyone looks equal in church, but I think Paul had another purpose for his hard admonishments of the Corninthian women. He notes for example how inappropriate it is that women speak out of turn and question their men. To the highly Patriarchal Roman society, a bunch of crazy religious nutjobs whose women are questioning thr established order, would have been a threat to Roman society. The behavior of the Corinthian women was likely drawing the attention of the Roman authorities, and since Paul's job was to safely grow the church before the inevitable persecution under the later emperors, he was basically asking the Corinthian women to chill. Regardless of whether my theory is accurate or not, it's clear that Paul put a premium on blending in as much as possible with Roman customs at the time. Thus, his dictats towards the early church should be taken in that context. This was how Christian women should behave and dress, because this is how ROMAN women should behave and dress. This is why I don't have a problem with the lack of head coverings or veils in modern churches; Paul's letter was REACTIONARY, not holy scripture. And that reaction is no longer necessary. Modern western churches exist in modern western society, who has no problem with women wearing head coverings or not. Ultimately, from a small church perspective admittedly, these rules about how someone dresses are irrelevant to the question of salvation. I don't think women are going to Hell because they wore pleated skirts or have earrings. Because their relationship with CHRIST is what gets them into Heaven. So even if everything I argued before this is wrong, I think my point still stands that women aren't required to cover their heads anymore.
@xb2x609
Ай бұрын
I see a lot of non-Muslims confused in the comments , women covering their head and upper chest in Islam is mandated by both the Quran and hadith (Non Qur'anic teaching/saying of the prophet PBUH) and there is no valid argument saying otherwise, All major sects of Islam agree on this matter and not following that is a sin but doesn't exclude you from Islam , May Allah guide us all ❤
@yuumimaisfrancaise
Ай бұрын
Somewhat. There is disagreement about the etymology used in the Quran and whether it includes the hair based on Pre-Arabian culture. It may have been common to cover hair, but hijab likely referred specifically to the abdomen, with hair covering being a cultural practice that eventually made its way into Islamic tradition.
@xb2x609
Ай бұрын
@@yuumimaisfrancaise you are mistaken , even if you throw the Quran verses for argument sake the Hadith and sunnah reinforce mandating covering the head , moreover All major scholars agree on the meaning of the verse
Пікірлер: 1,4 М.