16
10
16
download/literature/watchtower/1949-9.pdf
../literature/watchtower/1949/9/1949-9-10.html
138
She
WATCHTOWER.
BROOKLYN,
N.
Y.
parts
receive
especial
attention
which
our
present
able
parts
do
not
need.
God
has
so
adjusted
the
body
and
given
such
especial
distinction
to
its
inferior
parts
that
there
is
no
clash
in
the
body,
but
its
parts
all
alike
care
for
one
another,"
(1
Cor.
12:
21-25,
An
Amer.
Trans.)
It
should
be
that
way
in
the
congre
gation
of
God's
people.
There
should
be
no
clash
or
disunion
because
of
the
relative
prominence
and
inferiority
of
male
and
female
as
to
privileges
of
service.
11
There
is
no
reason
for
us
to
be
ashamed
of
the
way
we
are
made
naturally
by
our
Creator;
he
made
everything
fit
us
nicely.
The
apostle
advises
us
to
use
common
sense
and
to
make
observations
for
our
selves
based
on
how
we
are
naturally
made:
"Judge
for
yourselves;
is
it
proper
for
an
unveiled
woman
to
pray
to
God?
Surely
nature
herself
teaches
you
that,
while
long
hair
is
disgraceful
for
a
man,
for
a
woman
long
hair
is
a
glory.
Her
hair
i~
given
her
as
a
covering."
(1
Cor.
11:
13-15,
Moffatt)
Does
woman
resent
her
natural
tendency
to
long
hairf
Does
she
not
consider
her
hair
to
be
a
glorifying
feature
about
her
and
hence
try
to
keep
it
and
to
wear
it
attractively?
God
gave
her
long
hair
as
a
sign
of
her
subjection
to
the
male,
not
for
her
oppres
sion
but
for
her
covering;
and
yet
this
covering
which
symbolizes
subjection
is
becoming
and
beauti
fying
to
the
female.
vYithout
it
what
would
she
look
like?
And
so
how
nicely
God
has
balanced
everything
for
comfort!
But
because
God
made
it
unnatural
for
a
man
to
have
long
hair
like
a
\voman,
those
Israel
ites
who
took
a
vow
and
became
Nazarites
for
life
or
for
a
period
of
time
did
not
touch
their
head
'with
a
clipper
or
a
razor.
They
let
hair
and
beard
grow
long
for
the
duration
of
their
vow.
Their
long
hair
served
as
a
public
humiliation
of
them
before
God
and
mun.-Num.
6:
1-21.
18
The
apostle
now
concludes
this
discussion
of
relative
positions
of
mule
and
female
in
the
Christian
congregation
by
saying:
''But
if
anyone
thinketh
to
be
contentious,
we
have
no
such
custom,
nor
yet
the
assemblies
of
God."
(1
Cor.
11:
16,
Rotherham;
also
Auth.
Fer.,
Am.
Stan.
Fer.
and
Douay)
Accord
ing
to
this
literal
rendering
of
Paul's
words
into
English
he
would
appear
to
say
that,
because
some
persons
might
choose
to
be
disputatious
and
rebel
against
this
custom
of
veiling
women
in
public
and
at
assemblies
of
God's
people,
the
apostles
and
con
gregations
do
not
recognize
such
a
custom
and
refuse
to
observe
it
among
themselves.
But
that
interpreta
tion
would
be
against
all
that
Paul
had
been
saying
in
the
preceding
verses.
Rather,
the
conclusion
to
the
matter
is
this:
19
If
any
person
disputes
the
matter
and
contends
for
another
custom
that
seelUS
to
allow
womankind
17.
How
Is
long
hair
tor
a
woman,
but
lor
a
man?
Why?
13.
19.
What
conclusion
does
Paul
draw
to
this
discussion
ot
veiling?
more
freedom
publicly,
then
let
it
be
sufficient
to
say
that
neither
we
apostles
nor
the
congregations
of
God
have
or
follow
the
custom
contended
for
by
the
opposer.
Accordingly,
Moffatt
renders
1
Corinthians
11:
16:
"If
anyone
presumes
to
raise
objections
on
this
point-well,
I
acknowledge
no
other
mode
of
worship,
and
neither
do
the
churches
of
God."
Other
modern
translations
present
it
similarly:
"But
if
anyone
is
disposed
to
be
contentious
about
it,
I
for
my
part
recognize
no
other
practice
in
worship
than
this,
and
neither
do
the
churches
of
God."
(An
Amer.
Trans.)
"If
anyone
is
disposed
to
be
contentious,
we
recognize
no
other
practice,
nor
do
the
churches
of
God."
(Rev.
Stan.
Ver.)
"In
case,
however,
anyone
seems
anxious
to
dispute
the
matter,
we
do
not
ob
serve
such
a
practice
[as
such
a
disputer
would
intro
duce,
footnote],
neither
do
the
churches
of
God."
(Gerrit
Verkuyl)
So
would
the
apostle
require
veil
ing
today!
PROPHESYING
20
Note
that
the
apostle
is
discussing
the
matter
of
a
woman's
praying
or
prophesying
publicly
in
a
mixed
congregation
of
God's
people.
When
doing
these
things
it
would
at
all
times
be
proper
to
weal'
a
veil
to
show
her
doing
these
things
only
in
subjec
tion
to
the
male
members
of
the
congregation.
Back
there
in
apostolic
days
the
holy
spirit
was
poured
out
upon
both
sexes,
so
that
at
meetings
of
the
con
gregation
the
women
as
well
as
the
men
would
be
inspired
by
the
spirit
and
would
have
a
prayer
to
offer
or
a
prophetic
explanation
to
make.
Hence
it
was
well
for
the
women
to
be
prepared
at
meeting
ror
such
unexpected
operations
of
the
spirit
upon
them
by
being
veiled.
Today,
however,
the
spirit
does
not
operate
outwardly
in
this
manner
so
as
to
inspire
the
WOlUen
as
well
as
the
men
to
pray
and
prophesy
or
explain
Scripture.
But
on
other
occasions,
apart
from
formal
meetings
of
the
congregation,
it
would
not
be
necessary
or
required
for
feminine
members
to
cover
their
heads
that
way.
We
remember
how
when
Samuel's
lUother
Hannah
visited
the
tabel'l1acle
at
Shiloh
she
stood
and
prayed
for
the
birth
of
this
boy.
She
did
not
wear
a
veil
or
headcovering
hiding
her
face;
otherwise
High
Priest
Eli
would
not
have
noticed
the
silent
movement
of
her
lips
and
thought
that
she
was
drunk.-1
Sam.
1:
9·27.
21
Although
the
veil
is
of
great
antiquity
as
a
part
of
female
attire,
yet
there
is
nothing
to
show
in
Scripture
that
women
who
were
devoted
to
God,
like
Sarah,
Rebekah,
Rachel,
etc.,
wore
or
had
to
cover
their
faces
with
a
veil
when
in
public
on
ordinary
occasions,
either
in
Egypt,
Palestine
or
Syria.
The
custom
of
veiling,
therefore,
did
not
arise
with
the
Jewish
Christian
women.
It
was
observed
by
the
Christians
of
the
first
century
because
of
what
was
~)
Why
In
apostolic
days
should
women
vell
at
meetings?
(b)
Today
what
requirement
Is
there
lor
women
to
veil,
and
where?
138 parts receive especial attention which our presentable parts do not need. God has so adjusted the hody and given such especial distinction to its inferior parts that there is no clash in the body, but its parts all alike care for one another.” (1 Cor. 12: 21-25, An Amer.Trans.) It should be that way in the congregation of God’s people. There should be no clash or disunion because of the relative prominence and inferiority of male and female as to privileges of service. ** There is no reason for us to be ashamed of the way we are made naturally by our Creator; he made everything fit us nicely. The apostle advises us to use common sense and to make observations for ourselves based on how we are naturally made: “Judge for yourselves; is it proper for an unveiled woman to pray to God? Surely nature herself teaches you that, while long hair is disgraceful for a man, for a woman long hair is a glory. Her hair is given her as a covering.” (1 Cor. 11:18-15, Moffatt) Does woman resent her natural tendency to long hair? Does she not consider her hair to be a glorifying feature about her and hence try to keep it and to wear it attractively? God gave her long hair as a sign of her subjection to the male, not for her oppression but for her covering; and yet this covering which symbolizes subjection is becoming and beautifying to the female. Without it what would she look like? And so how nicely God has balanced everything for comfort! But because God made it unnatural for aman to have long hair like a woman, those Israelites who took a vow and became Nazarites for life or for a period of time did not touch their head with a clipper or a razor. They let hair and beard grow long for the duration of their vow. Their long hair served as a public humiliation of them before God and man.—Num. 6: 1-21. **The apostle now concludes this discussion of relative positions of male and female in the Christian congregation by saying: “But if anyone thinketh to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor yet the assemblies of God.” (1 Cor. 11:16, Rotherham; also Auth. Ver., Am. Stan. Ver. and Doway) According to this literal rendering of Paul’s words into English he would appear to say that, because some persons might choose to be disputatious and rebel against this custom of veiling women in public and at assemblies of God’s people, the apostles and congregations do not recognize such a custom and refuse to observe it among themselves. But that interpretation would be against all that Paul had been saying in the preceding verses. Rather, the conclusion to the matter is this: ** Tf any person disputes the matter and contends for another custom that seems to allow womankind 17. How ts long hair for a woman, but for a man? Why? 1g; 19. What conclusion does Paul draw to this discussion of veiling? She WATCHTOWER. Brooxiyn, N. Y. more freedom publicly, then let it be sufficient to say that neither we apostles nor the congregations of God have or follow the custom contended for by the opposer. Accordingly, Moffatt renders 1 Corinthians 11:16: “If anyone presumes to raise objections on this point—well, I acknowledge no other mode of worship, and neither do the churches of God.” Other modern translations present it similarly: “But if anyone is disposed to be contentious about it, I for my part recognize no other practice in worship than this, and neither do the churches of God.” (An Amer. Trans.) “If any one is disposed to be contentious, we recognize no other practice, nor do the churches of God.” (Rev. Stan. Ver.) “In case, however, anyone seems anxious to dispute the matter, we do not observe such a practice [as such a disputer would introduce, footnote], neither do the churches of God.” (Gerrit Verkuyl) So would the apostle require veiling today? PROPHESYING 7° Note that the apostle is discussing the matter of a woman’s praying or prophesying publicly in a mixed congregation of God’s people. When doing these things it would at all times be proper to wear a veil to show her doing these things only in subjection to the male members of the congregation. Back there in apostolic days the holy spirit was poured out upon both sexes, so that at meetings of the congregation the women as well as the men would be inspired by the spirit and would have a4 prayer to offer or a prophetic explanation to make. Hence it was well for the women to be prepared at meeting for such unexpected operations of the spirit upon them by being veiled. Today, however, the spirit does not operate outwardly in this manner so as to inspire the women as well as the men to pray and prophesy or explain Scripture. But on other occasions, apart from formal meetings of the congregation, it would not be necessary or required for feminine members to cover their heads that way. We remember how when Samuel’s mother Hannah visited the tabernacle at Shiloh she stood and prayed for the birth of this boy. She did not wear a veil or headcovering hiding her face; otherwise High Priest Eli would not have noticed the silent movement of her lips and thought that she was drunk.—1 Sam. 1: 9-27. 7 Although the veil is of great antiquity as a part of female attire, yet there is nothing to show in Scripture that women who were devoted to God, like Sarah, Rebekah, Rachel, ete., wore or had to cover their faces with a veil when in public on ordinary occasions, either in Egypt, Palestine or Syria. The custom of veiling, therefore, did not arise with the Jewish Christian women. It was observed by the Christians of the first century because of what was 20, (a) Why in apostolic days should women vell at meetings? (b) Poasy what requ Tement is there for women to veil, and where?
To enhance your experience on our website, we use cookies and similar technologies. Some cookies are essential for the core functionality of our site and cannot be declined. You can choose to accept or decline additional cookies. We want to assure you that none of this data will be sold or used for marketing purposes. You can adjust your preferences at any time by accessing the Privacy Settings from the footer of the page. For more information, please refer to our
Privacy Policy
Terms of Use
.
