Signs of Life

The Law of Moses and the Law of God

2009-12-14T12:29:00.000-08:00

There has recently arrived a debate on a friend’s Facebook page over the Law of Moses. The issue became quite heated, and after a night to rest, and to pray, I have decided to prepare a response and to post it here. This response is primarily aimed at the participants of that debate, although I welcome anyone to comment and to respond. Let us keep peace here, brethren, and seek the unity of the Spirit even among contention. I remind my readers that I moderate all comments posted to this blog, and I reserve the right not to post any comments I find distasteful or offensive; however, I give you my word that I will not edit out anything for lack of response on my part! I too search for the Truth, and I pray that we find it together. I do want to warn you that I phrase some things in here quite strongly—Paul phrased things strongly as well, and I like he “think also that I have the Spirit of God” (1 Corinthians 7:40). Please do not take this as me attacking anyone. I am only striving to uphold the Word of God and to make His Name known :-)

Let’s start with some assumptions. I’m sure we all agree on these points, but if we don’t, let me know and I’ll address where we don’t agree.

1. God is the ultimate Lawgiver. What anyone does, whether “religious” or not, does not affect the Law of God—no preacher or rabbi, counsel or professing Church, can alter what God has said. It is irrelevant what man says; man cannot change God.

2. God’s will has always existed, even before time, the world, and mankind existed. He always had a perfect will—a Law—in mind for His people to live in and under. This means that everyone in the world has always lived under the expectation that they will obey God’s Will.

3. At Sinai, God gave certain rules and regulations to Moses and to the Jewish people; I will from here on in refer to this as the Law of Moses, recognizing that God gave it to Moses. These rules in the Law of Moses were binding on the entire Jewish nation, at least until the time of Christ.

4. The Law of Moses was given for two reasons:
a. Because of sin (Galatians 3:19)
b. To be a “schoolmaster” to bring people to Christ (Galatians 3:24-25)

Before we begin, I’d like to note that I will be constantly reiterating the “Law of Moses” as such; that is to say, I will not just refer to the Law of Moses as “the Law.” As we established in point two, God has always had a Law, which transcends the Law of Moses (as is my central argument in this post). I apologize if this sounds redundant in this post, but I feel it is vital because of the massive confusion that has come about by referring to both the Law of Moses and God’s Will as “the Law.”

I’d also like to remark that I am aiming this post at Gentile believers. While I do not believe that anyone, Jew or Gentile, is bound to follow the Law of Moses, I freely cede that Jewish believers have the option to maintain their Jewish culture and to in so doing keep the Law of Moses—in so far as it does not contradict the revealed and more perfect Law of God as is revealed in the New Testament. Gentile believers, on the other hand, have no right to Jewish culture, and as I will argue below, have absolutely no obligation to follow the Law of Moses (and indeed to attempt to do so is to scorn Christ’s work on the cross).

I’d like to address some arguments that I’ve received. The argument will be given in old font and “quotation marks,” and my remarks will be underneath.

“Jesus did not ‘nail’ the Law of Moses to the Cross. He just nailed the unbiblical requirements given by rabbis to the cross (manmade doctrines or rules), and forgave us of the penalty of sins.”

I can’t find this concept anywhere in the Scriptures. Rather, I find statements like this:

“And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; and having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.” (Colossians 2:13-15)

Do you see that? We were dead in sin and in our Gentile status, cut off from God on two counts. Yet Jesus Christ gave us life and forgave our sins. He did that through blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that were against us. The Law of Moses, written by the Hand of God, was designed to witness against us (Deuteronomy 31:26). Yet Jesus nailed it to His cross! Surely this passage does not refer to man’s ordinances. I find no such phrasing in this passage. Man’s laws are not the only thing against us. Even so, we are still to follow man’s law as much as we can without transgressing God’s Law. Jesus would not have nailed the speed limit to his cross. He would not have nailed requirements irrelevant to salvation, requirements already not binding on individual Christians, to the cross! No, he nailed that witness against us—the Law of Moses—to death that we might with Him triumph over principalities and powers!

“The Law of Moses was followed by Christ and by the Early Church, so it must be obeyed by us.”

This can be a sticky issue, so I ask that you read what I write carefully. I will cede for the sake of argument that Christ followed the Law of Moses perfectly. I will also cede that some in the Early Church sought to follow the Law of Moses—although it is absolute fallacy that the Early Church universally followed the Law of Moses. Have you not read in Galatians the scathing rebuke that Paul brought on those who demand that Gentile believers obey the Law of Moses? Paul himself claimed to be dead to the Law of Moses (Galatians 2:19), recognizing that it was antithetical to new life in Christ! The early Christians who sought to follow the Law of Moses were in error. Yes, Jesus followed the Law of Moses. He had to. He was Jewish. He was a Jew before the Law of Moses was nailed to the Cross. Yet we are Christians after that Law of Moses was dead and buried. Jesus returned to life, but the Law of Moses is dead!

To further emphasize the point that the majority of the Early Church did not accept the Law of Moses as valid, I'd like to quote from some of the members of the Early Church. These are strongly worded but incredibly insightful:

"But again (the Jews') scruples concerning meats, and their superstition relating to the sabbath and the vanity of their circumcision and the dissimulation of their fasting and new moons, I do [not] suppose you need to learn from me, are ridiculous and unworthy of any consideration. For of the things created by God for the use of man to receive some as created well, but to decline others as useless and superfluous, is not this impious? And again to lie against God, as if He forbad us to do any good thing on the sabbath day, is not this profane? Again, to vaunt the mutilation of the flesh as a token of election as though for this reason they were particularly beloved by God, is not this ridiculous? And to watch the stars and the moon and to keep the observance of months and of days, and to distinguish the arrangements of God and the changes of the seasons according to their own impulses, making some into festivals and others into times of mourning, who would regard this as an exhibition of godliness and not much more of folly? That the Christians are right therefore in holding aloof from the common silliness and error of the Jews and from their excessive fussiness and pride, I consider that thou hast been sufficiently instructed; but as regards the mystery of their own religion, expect not that thou canst be instructed by man." (Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus)

(Justin Martyr speaking) "'Is there any other matter, my friends, in which we are blamed, than this, that we live not after the law, and are not circumcised in the flesh as your forefathers were, and do not observe sabbaths as you do? Are our lives and customs also slandered among you? And I ask this: have you also believed concerning us, that we eat men; and that after the feast, having extinguished the lights, we engage in promiscuous concubinage? Or do you condemn us in this alone, that we adhere to such tenets, and believe in an opinion, untrue, as you think?'

     'This is what we are amazed at,' said Trypho, '...in that you observe no festivals or sabbaths, and do not have the rite of circumcision; and further, resting your hopes on a man that was crucified, you yet expect to obtain some good thing from God, while you do not obey His commandments. Have you not read, that soul shall be cut off from his people who shall not have been circumcised on the eighth day? And this has been ordained for strangers and for slaves equally. But you, despising this covenant rashly, reject the consequent duties, and attempt to persuade yourselves that you know God, when, however, you perform none of those things which they do who fear God. If, therefore, you can defend yourself on these points, and make it manifest in what way you hope for anything whatsoever, even though you do not observe the law, this we would very gladly hear from you, and we shall make other similar investigations.'

     'There will be no other God, O Trypho, nor was there from eternity any other existing' (I thus addressed him), 'but He who made and disposed all this universe. Nor do we think that there is one God for us, another for you, but that He alone is God who led your fathers out from Egypt with a strong hand and a high arm. Nor have we trusted in any other (for there is no other), but in Him in whom you also have trusted, the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob. But we do not trust through Moses or through the law; for then we would do the same as yourselves. But now--(for I have read that there shall be a final law, and a covenant, the chiefest of all, which it is now incumbent on all men to observe, as many as are seeking after the inheritance of God. For the law promulgated on Horeb is now old, and belongs to yourselves alone; but this is for all universally. Now, law placed against law has abrogated that which is before it, and a covenant which comes after in like manner has put an end to the previous one; and an eternal and final law--namely, Christ--has been given to us, and the covenant is trustworthy, after which there shall be no law, no commandment, no ordinance. Have you not read this which Isaiah says: 'Hearken unto Me, hearken unto Me, my people; and, ye kings, give ear unto Me: for a law shall go forth from Me, and My judgment shah be for a light to the nations. My righteousness approaches swiftly, and My salvation shall go forth, and nations shall trust in Mine arm?' And by Jeremiah, concerning this same new covenant, He thus speaks: 'Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah; not according to the covenant which I made with their fathers, in the day that I took them by the hand, to bring them out of the land of Egypt'). If, therefore, God proclaimed a new covenant which was to be instituted, and this for a light of the nations, we see and are persuaded that men approach God, leaving their idols and other unrighteousness, through the name of Him who was crucified, Jesus Christ, and abide by their confession even unto death, and maintain piety. Moreover, by the works and by the attendant miracles, it is possible for all to understand that He is the new law, and the new covenant, and the expectation of those who out of every people wait for the good things of God. For the true spiritual Israel, and descendants of Judah, Jacob, Isaac, and Abraham (who in uncircumcision was approved of and blessed by God on account of his faith, and called the father of many nations), are we who have been led to God through this crucified Christ, as shall be demonstrated while we proceed.

     I also adduced another passage in which Isaiah exclaims: 'Hear My words, and your soul shall live; and I will make an everlasting covenant with you, even the sure mercies of David. Behold, I have given Him for a witness to the people: nations which know not Thee shall call on Thee; peoples who know not Thee shall escape to Thee, because of thy God, the Holy One of Israel; for He has glorified Thee.' This same law you have despised, and His new holy covenant you have slighted; and now you neither receive it, nor repent of your evil deeds. 'For your ears are closed, your eyes are blinded, and the heart is hardened,' Jeremiah has cried; yet not even then do you listen. The Lawgiver is present, yet you do not see Him; to the poor the Gospel is preached, the blind see, yet you do not understand. You have now need of a second circumcision, though you glory greatly in the flesh. The new law requires you to keep perpetual sabbath, and you, because you are idle for one day, suppose you are pious, not discerning why this has been commanded you: and if you eat unleavened bread, you say the will of God has been fulfilled. The Lord our God does not take pleasure in such observances: if there is any perjured person or a thief among you, let him cease to be so; if any adulterer, let him repent; then he has kept the sweet and true sabbaths of God. If any one has impure hands, let him wash and be pure." (Justin Martyr, "Dialogue")

"For the abolition of the ancient law we fully admit, and hold that it actually proceeds from the dispensation of the Creator,— a point which we have already often treated in the course of our discussion, when we showed that the innovation was foretold by the prophets of our God. Now, if the Creator indeed promised that "the ancient things should pass away," to be superseded by a new course of things which should arise, while Christ marks the period of the separation when He says, "The law and the prophets were until John" Luke 16:16 — thus making the Baptist the limit between the two dispensations of the old things then terminating— and the new things then beginning, the apostle cannot of course do otherwise, (coming as he does) in Christ, who was revealed after John, than invalidate "the old things" and confirm "the new," and yet promote thereby the faith of no other god than the Creator, at whose instance it was foretold that the ancient things should pass away." (Tertullian, "Against Marcion")

Several examples are listed in the following link, and I welcome you to search them out for yourself: The Early Church and the Law of Moses. It should be plainly obvious now that the Early Church did not as a rule follow the Law of Moses, but rather condemned Gentile believers for attempting to take up that dead Law.

“Because there is one Lawgiver, there may only be one Law for God’s people, and that Law is the Law of Moses.”

I agree with the first part of this statement. There is only one Lawgiver, and only one Law. We don’t have one system for Gentiles and one for Jews in terms of salvation—although we used to, since Gentiles outside of Israel were not bound to the Law of Moses. Yet, God’s will has always existed. He has always had a will for His people. His perfect Will is what I refer to as the “Law of God.” There was a Law before Moses. God judged the people during the Flood for breaking His Law—they transgressed His will. Abraham was lauded for following God's Law, hundreds of years before Moses was even born. Adam and Eve broke God's Law when they broke His commandment to not eat of the Tree. I can point to dozens of other, obvious examples, but let's suffice it to say that God didn't just decide after three or four thousand years of history to express His will to the people. There has always, always been a set code of conduct and belief that God wanted people to follow--His will and His Law. God has been progressively revealing that Law, that will, throughout human history, and it culminated in the teachings of Jesus and the revelations to the Apostles. It is that Law, the Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus (Romans 8:2), which is the perfect revelation of God's Will for His people. It is that Law that we are bound to as Christians. We are not lawless!

I’m going to make a statement that I’m fairly sure most “on the other side” of this debate are not understanding, but it is central to understanding the crux of my position. The Law of Moses was a temporary provision, given about 1200 years before Christ. That means there were several thousand years before the Law given to Moses, and that Jesus came about 1000 years after it was given. The Law of Moses existed and was binding for about 1000 years. It was given to rule the Kingdom of Israel. God wanted to purify a people for Himself, and He gave the Law of Moses to point them to Him and to rein in sin (Galatians 3:24-25, Galatians 3:19). He gave the Law, not as a perfect manifestation of His Will, but rather to point Jews to Him and to prepare them for the Messiah.

Yet the Law of Moses is not perfect. Jesus made this abundantly clear when He corrected the Law of Moses (Matthew 5:22-44 and Matthew 12:5-7 are just two examples of many). The Law of Moses had a purpose—to sustain Israel and to prepare them for the Messiah—but Christ made it clear that the imperfect Law of Moses had past its purpose. That Law was added because of sin (Galatians 3:19), but now that we are redeemed from sin (Titus 2:4), we are we have no need of the Law of Moses. Rather, the Mosaic Law blocks us from true faith (Galatians 3:23), and so praise God, Christ redeemed us from the Law of Moses!

“Leviticus 24:22 says that there will be one Law for both the Jew and the ‘stranger.’”

The context and the phrasing makes this clear that the meaning is that there will be one Law in Israel at that time. The Jews were to treat the “strangers” as under the Law of Moses, like they as Jews were. I want you to notice that this doesn’t make strangers into Jews. It just made the strangers residing in Israel accountable for following the Law of Moses. This has absolutely nothing to do with life outside of Israel after Christ. It’s an “equality phrase” for legal fairness in ancient Israel. It would be the same as saying that the speed limit is binding both on me, as a legal American citizen, and on Joe Schmo, the fictitious illegal alien next door. It is a legal equality, not a statement that the Law of Moses is eternal or the perfect will of God.

“The Law of Moses is there to show us how to live right before God.”

The Mosaic Law’s purpose was to show us that we were sinners before God and to rein in sin, certainly. Yet we have another Law that does the same thing much more perfectly—the Law of the Spirit. That Law is much more perfect than the Law of Moses, and we are freed from sin under that perfect Law! Please read Galatians 5:18-26 to see how we are freed from sin under the Law of the Spirit—the ultimate and perfect Law of God.

“Jesus said that not one jot or tittle of the Law would pass away.”

Let’s read that verse in context. “For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” (Matthew 5:18). The Law of Moses is fulfilled in Christ! It is finished! It is passed away! Do you see how many times Jesus did things to “fulfill the Law?”

“For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” (Galatians 5:14)

“Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.” (Romans 13:8)

“For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” (Romans 8:3-4)

“But those things, which God before had shewed by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled.” (Acts 3:18)

“And when they had fulfilled all that was written of him, they took him down from the tree, and laid him in a sepulchre.” (Acts 13:29)

Do you see that the Law of Moses was fulfilled in Christ, and it is fulfilled in us living after the Spirit? We are free from the Law that the righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us as we walk after the Spirit. Glory to God!

“God did not do away with the Old Covenant, but he merely renewed it.”

I make no apologies in saying that this is unscriptural.

“But now hath he (Christ) obtained a more excellent ministry (than the priests under the Old Covenant), by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. For if that first covenant (the Law of Moses) had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second (the Law given by Christ). For finding fault with them (the Jews under the Law of Moses), he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more. In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.”

The Old Covenant is dead, vanished away. We have a New Covenant through Christ. This cannot be more clear through the Scriptures.

~*~*~

Let’s now look at some Scriptural passages and discover what the Bible says about the Law of Moses more deeply.

“But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised: And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage: To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.” (Galatians 2:2-5)

Titus was not compelled to be circumcised, but yet apparently that was an exception to what was happening. “False brethren” were coming in to demand that believing Gentiles be circumcised—demanding that they at least show some willingness to submit to the Law of Moses (circumcision was the “entry point” to the Law, and under the Law of Moses an uncircumcised man was rejected and cut off from Israel—Genesis 17:14). Paul insisted that the Church did not submit to their will and more importantly did not accept their teaching as true! If circumcision is unnecessary as this passage indicates, and it is impossible for a man to enter into the Law of Moses without circumcision (which it is), then there is no way that the Gentiles must be under the Law of Moses; that is exactly the conclusion that Paul brings forth in this passage.

“But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation. But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews? We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.” (Galatians 2:11-16)

Peter here was apparently holding to a Jewish custom (I understand that it’s not of the Law of Moses) in order to please the Jews. Yet Paul cut to the heart of the matter, seeing that the Truth of the Gospel was antithetical to justification under the Law of Moses. Read this clearly: “By the works of the Law (of Moses) shall no flesh be justified,” and “We (are) justified by the faith (in) Christ, and not by the works of the Law (of Moses).” It is clear as day here that we are not justified by the Law of Moses, but rather by (trusting, obedient) faith in Christ, and what He taught us to do after His Coming to earth. Do you see the difference here? Absolutely no justification (“remission of sin and absolution from guilt and punishment; or an act of free grace by which God pardons the sinner and accepts him as righteous”—Webster’s 1828 dictionary) comes from the Law of Moses. It comes solely through faith in Christ (and a faith that willingly follows whatever He says).

Galatians 2:19-21: “For I through the Law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God. I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.”

Let’s notice some things:

“I am dead to the Law.” A man who is dead is not bound to obey the Law of Moses. He can’t! He’s dead! Paul here is obviously saying that the Law of Moses had no effect on him, since he was dead to the law.

“…that I might live unto God.” Do you see the contrast here? Paul is making the Law of Moses antithetical to life in God. We are crucified and dead to the Law (and to our own flesh, but that’s another subject :-D), that we might live after the Spirit and after Christ who “liveth in” us.

“The life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God.” This is again another statement of antithesis. The Law given to Moses demanded that “[t]he man that doeth them shall live in them” (Galatians 3:12). It was the way he would live in. Paul is saying, “I once lived in the Law of Moses, but the life that I now live, I live by the faith of the Son of God.” The two are antithetical. You cannot live in the Law and live in the Faith at the same time (Galatians 3:11-13)

“Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth? For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man. Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.” (Romans 7:1-4)

Do you see what Paul is saying here? As a woman is bound to her husband until death parts them, so were we bound to the Law of Moses until that Law died, and until we died. As we are dead and freed from marriage to the Law of Moses, let us go and marry Christ, that “we should bring forth fruit unto God.”

“1O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you? This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh? Have ye suffered so many things in vain? if it be yet in vain. He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?” (Galatians 3:1-5)

These are some incredibly strong words! Paul accuses the Galatians of being foolish and of having a vain faith. Why is this? Because they believed that the Law of Moses was what made them righteous, that the Mosaic Law was the guiding force over their lives rather than the Spirit. We do not live under the Law of Moses, brethren! We live under the guidance of the Spirit. The two are antithetical. To accept the Old Law means rejecting the Spirit, as is clearly laid out in this passage, and is utter foolishness! Verses 6 to 10 go on to describe that faith, not the Law of Moses, makes us heirs to the promise given to Abraham. What precious promises we have by faith in Christ!

“For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.” (Galatians 3:9-14)

Paul goes on afterward to describe that the Law given to Moses did not disannul the covenant given to Abraham, but rather, Christ’s ministry confirmed that covenant despite that Law. It is incredibly obvious to me how antithetical the Law of Moses and the Faith of Christ are in this passage. The Law of Moses is a curse! Those who are under that Law are cursed! Yet Christ redeemed us from the curse that we might be rightful heirs to the promise given to Abraham through the Spirit and through faith. What glory is meted here, what freedom given to us. We are “redeemed from the curse of the Law.”

I want to point something very important out to you.

“Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree.” (Galatians 3:13)

Do you see that word, “redeemed?” What does that word mean? Let’s see how it’s used elsewhere in Scripture.

“Wherefore say unto the children of Israel, I am the LORD, and I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and I will rid you out of their bondage, and I will redeem you with a stretched out arm, and with great judgments…” (Exodus 6:6)

“And it came to pass, when Pharaoh would hardly let us go, that the LORD slew all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both the firstborn of man, and the firstborn of beast: therefore I sacrifice to the LORD all that openeth the matrix, being males; but all the firstborn of my children I redeem.” (Exodus 13:15)

“And what one nation in the earth is like thy people Israel, whom God went to redeem to be his own people, to make thee a name of greatness and terribleness, by driving out nations from before thy people whom thou hast redeemed out of Egypt?” (1 Chronicles 17:21)

“Did I say, Bring unto me? or, Give a reward for me of your substance? Or, Deliver me from the enemy's hand? or, Redeem me from the hand of the mighty?” (Job 6:22-23)

“Redeem Israel, O God, out of all his troubles.” (Psalm 25:22)

“But as for me, I will walk in mine integrity: redeem me, and be merciful unto me.” (Psalm 26:11)

“Arise for our help, and redeem us for thy mercies' sake.” (Psalm 44:26)

“But God will redeem my soul from the power of the grave: for he shall receive me. Selah.” (Psalm 49:15)

“And he shall redeem Israel from all his iniquities.” (Psalm 130:8)

“And I will deliver thee out of the hand of the wicked, and I will redeem thee out of the hand of the terrible.” (Jeremiah 15:21)

“I will ransom them from the power of the grave; I will redeem them from death: O death, I will be thy plagues; O grave, I will be thy destruction: repentance shall be hid from mine eyes.” (Hosea 13:14)

Most importantly it’s used in two passages in the New Testament:

“But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.” (Galatians 4:4-5)

“Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.” (Titus 2:14)

To redeem means to make free from bondage, to abolish a hold over a bound person, to liberate! When God liberated a people from oppression, He freed them from any and all obligation to his oppressor. Surely, surely when He redeemed us “from the Law” of Moses, He freed us from any and all obligation to that Law! Redemption from iniquity is complete. We are not bound to obey sin any more! Surely, surely redemption from the Law means we are not bound to obey the Law of Moses any more.

“Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.

“For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband. Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.

“Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman. So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free. Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

“Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.

“Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth? This persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you. A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump. I have confidence in you through the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise minded: but he that troubleth you shall bear his judgment, whosoever he be.

“And I, brethren, if I yet preach circumcision, why do I yet suffer persecution? then is the offence of the cross ceased. I would they were even cut off which trouble you. For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.” (Galatians 4:21-5:13)

Powerful, powerful words! God through Paul here compares the Law of Moses and the Law of life in Christ to the difference between Isaac and Ishmael. Ishmael was born because of the sinfulness of man. He was given some power, though his power was limited and promised to bring destruction. Yet Isaac was born because of the promises of God, and he was to have the full blessing and will of God behind him. What glory! Let us “cast out” the bondwoman and her son—let us cast out the Law of Moses and walk after the promises of God. Let us not be entangled with that yoke of bondage to the Old, dead Law, but rather to stand fast in the liberty that Christ died to give us.

I ask those of you who desire to be under the Law of Moses, what is the offense of the Cross? If the Cross was not the instrument of death for the Law of Moses, why is it so offensive? Truly the offense is present in that the Law of Moses was slain with Christ.

Jesus is the "author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him" (Hebrews 5:9).

Yet have you noticed these passages in the Scripture?

"O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you (in convincing you to cling to the Law of Moses), that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you? This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?" (Galatians 3:1-2)

"Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth? This persuasion (that you must be circumcised and follow the Law of Moses) cometh not of him that calleth you." (Galatians 5:7-8)

The context for both of these verses is that Paul is condemning those who trusted in the Law of Moses for righteousness. Do you see that? He is saying that by seeking the Law of Moses, those people were not obeying the truth. God revealed something new in His Son, Jesus Christ. He changed the rules! Why else would what was once obedience to God (following the Law as given to Moses) now become disobedience, hindering and bewitching the would-be believer into spurning Christ's salvation? It is because the Law of Moses is now dead and ineffectual for the Christian--yea rather, it causes disobedience to Christ to cling to it!

Please note the strong condemnation Paul gives here to those who long to be under the Law of Moses: “Christ shall profit you nothing,” “who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth?” “A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump,” “ye are fallen from grace!” The Law brings damnation to us and takes us out from under the protection of Christ. Let’s run from it, brethren, and leave it dead that we might live to Christ!

You now have a choice. You may trust in the Law, or you may trust in Christ. You may not have both. I have shown you how it is impossible to claim Christ’s righteousness and yet to trust in the Law of Moses. Come, leave the crucified Law of Moses, still dead and in the grave, and serve the Risen Savior! His Law is just and perfect, reflecting the Will of God from before the beginning of the world. The Law of Moses has no binding on us, since we are dead to it, and it to us (Romans 7:1-4). Let us live unto Christ, and after the Perfect Law revealed in the New Testament!

“For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.” (Romans 8:2)

Some more Scripture on which to ponder:
Ephesians chapters 1-3 (I may add this to the above study; it is incredibly powerful), Romans 3, Romans 7 and 8, Romans 10, Acts 15, Philippians 3:8-11; Ephesians 2:12-17; Galatians 6:12-14; Galatians 5:2-4; Galatians 4:21-31; Galatians 3:23-25; Galatians 3:10-12; Matthew 11:28-30; Matthew 12:1-8; Mark 2:27; Romans 14:5-17; Galatians 3; Galatians 4; Colossians 2:16-17; Hebrews 1:1-2; Hebrews 8:13; Hebrews 3; Hebrews 4

Back from an unintentional sabbatical with a lot of thoughts!

2009-08-07T13:45:00.000-07:00

Hi, all! Wow, I can't believe that it's literally been months since I've posted here. I've been very busy offline, both in terms of school (praise the Lord, I graduated in May!) and personal life (among other things, I've begun to have many conversations with unsaved friends). Yet at the same time, the Lord has lead me to many topics of study. I'm planning on working on them and posting them here.

One of the topics I've been working on was a dual subject, namely the relationship between works and salvation (whether there is one or not), and whether or not we are eternally secure without condition. That topic, Lord willing, will come soon, although it's taken me a while to sort through some arguments that have been made on both sides.

Also, I'm planning to do a series on evangelism, and specifically a series discussing both false religion and true Christianity. This will definitely take me a while, as I plan to cover dozens of groups, some of which will literally take probably a dozen or more articles a piece.

:-) I appreciate your prayers and support. The Lord is good and gracious to all that call on His Name in obedience and trust!

Love in Christ,

Sarah

What does it mean to be "covered?" An investigation into the word "cover" in the Bible and how it connects to women and their heads

2009-04-14T14:18:00.001-07:00

There has for quite some time been an argument over what 1 Corinthians 11:1-16 is discussing. It is quite clear that this passage instructs women to cover their heads. The real contention is this: is the Holy Spirit here through Paul commanding that women cover their heads with a literal cloth veiling over their natural covering of hair, or is the instruction rather that women grow their hair long that it may be a covering? My goal in this study is to further illuminate our understanding of what the covering is in these passages by studying other passages in the Bible that discuss covering the head and the status of a woman’s hair. I am invoking the “law of first mention” as a study tool; that is, I am going to use the Old Testament as a guide to interpret the New Testament. Please note that this is by no means exhaustive, but I have chosen a sufficient number of passages from different categories to expound the meaning of that word; I am not intentionally leaving anything out but for the sake of brevity I am not including every example, only sufficient examples to understand the way the word is used in that type of passage. With that in mind, please attempt to have an open mind about what I am bringing forth. Let’s start from “ground zero.” The Bible was written with Genesis, and we should start there.

The first place in the Bible where the word “cover” is used is Genesis 7:19.

And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.

It is evident that this covering is an all-encompassing covering. The waters of the flood covered every square inch of land upon the earth. Nothing was left uncovered or dry. The word translated “covered” here is כּסה (English transliteration kasah), which means “to plump, that is, fill up hollows; by implication to cover (for clothing or secrecy): - clad self, close, clothe, conceal, cover (self), (flee to) hide, overwhelm.” The image here is that the water filled in the valleys and the hills like a blanket covers an entire bed, including indentations and pillows (and the occasional cat!).

There are several other instances where the word “cover” is used to describe the flood and other miracles (such as the plagues of Egypt), but one is sufficient since they are all the same Hebrew word, and since we are studying headcovering and not the flood or other historical events (not that the latter is unimportant!). The same word is also used in Psalm 32:1, and I believe we would all agree that our sins are wholly covered under the blood of Jesus our Lord!

Let’s look at the first place where the word “cover” is used to describe clothing.

Genesis 9:23: And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness.

We all know the story: Noah was drunk and naked (in the Bible, “naked” does not always mean that a person is completely without clothes—remember that Peter was “naked” on the ship? He wasn’t completely undressed but rather improperly dressed—it can mean either completely undressed or improperly dressed. So Noah might have been completely naked, but more than likely he was just missing some clothing.), and Ham discovered his father’s nakedness. He told his brothers, who in this verse without looking at their father covered him properly.

The Hebrew word here is the same word (kasah), implying that Shem and Japheth pulled the covering up over every part of their father’s nakedness.

Let’s look at the first example of covering being used to describe a woman.

Genesis 24:65 For she had said unto the servant, What man is this that walketh in the field to meet us? And the servant had said, It is my master: therefore she took a vail, and covered herself.

The Hebrew word for vail here is צעיף, transliterated into English as tsaeef. The word means simply a veil, but is from a root word that means “to wrap over.” Once more, the word for “covered” is the same Hebrew word (kasah). So the image here is of Rebekah taking her shawl and “wrapping it over” herself. (see footnote 1 for a side note on this passage). It was clearly a veil separate from her head and her hair.

Let’s look at another example of covering with a woman.

Genesis 38:14 And she put her widow's garments off from her, and covered her with a vail, and wrapped herself, and sat in an open place, which is by the way to Timnath; for she saw that Shelah was grown, and she was not given unto him to wife.

This passage uses the same Hebrew words as the last passage. This passage is slightly different, in that it is clear that Tamar covered her face (look at the next verse). Once more, though, she wholly covered (with a literal cloth veiling) her hair and her face, her beauty and her identity, that she would not be known by Judah.

Let’s look at one more example of women and covering.

Isaiah 47:1-3 Come down, and sit in the dust, O virgin daughter of Babylon, sit on the ground: there is no throne, O daughter of the Chaldeans: for thou shalt no more be called tender and delicate. Take the millstones, and grind meal: uncover thy locks, make bare the leg, uncover the thigh, pass over the rivers. Thy nakedness shall be uncovered, yea, thy shame shall be seen: I will take vengeance, and I will not meet thee as a man.

God here is saying to rebellious Babylon, “I am going to shame you because of your transgressions, and the way in which I am going to shame you is that I am going to make you naked.” Yes, this passage is a metaphor, but it is a metaphor that would have been understood within Hebrew and Babylonian societies for the reason that the literal actions described would be shameful for a woman to have happen to her.

The word translated “uncover” in this passage is גּלה, or gahlaw. It means to make nude (especially in a disgraceful sense). Its further implication is to dishonor, to discover the glory of, to destroy the honor of, or to uncover the shame of someone. God says here to uncover a woman’s hair, her legs, and her thighs is shameful, dishonorable nakedness.

Isaiah 3:16-24 shows how women also used this covering, meant to be a symbol of modesty, as an excuse for wantonness and for playing the harlot. The Lord in this passage is talking about the shame of Zion, both as a nation and I believe in the lives of individual women; therefore, this passage is both metaphorical and literal.

Moreover the LORD saith, Because the daughters of Zion are haughty, and walk with stretched forth necks and wanton eyes, walking and mincing as they go, and making a tinkling with their feet: Therefore the LORD will smite with a scab the crown of the head of the daughters of Zion, and the LORD will discover their secret parts. In that day the Lord will take away the bravery of their tinkling ornaments about their feet, and their cauls, and their round tires like the moon, the chains, and the bracelets, and the mufflers, the bonnets, and the ornaments of the legs, and the headbands, and the tablets, and the earrings, the rings, and nose jewels, the changeable suits of apparel, and the mantles, and the wimples, and the crisping pins, the glasses, and the fine linen, and the hoods, and the vails. And it shall come to pass, that instead of sweet smell there shall be stink; and instead of a girdle a rent; and instead of well set hair baldness; and instead of a stomacher a girding of sackcloth; and burning instead of beauty.

Those are some strong words! The daughters of Zion had discarded their God-given beauty for wantonness, just as Israel discarded the Covenant for idolatry. Rather than wearing a simple, modest dress and head shawl, these women wore fancy clothing and jewelry, and made their headcoverings a display and a glory to them. We ought to meditate on these Scriptures and think on how God views outward adornment (although this is another topic that I will write on later, Lord willing).

It is clear in the Old Testament that the custom formed for women to cover their heads (and bodies) out of modesty with literal clothing, and by Isaiah’s day it was shameful to go about with hair, legs, or thighs—the beauty of a woman--exposed. What is interesting, though, is that most of the passages in the Old Testament that discuss covering the head refer to men (while most of the modern debate is about women…think about that for a bit. Why is the fact of men uncovering their heads not a significant part of this debate when it is a huge issue in Jewish circles?). Let’s explore some of those passages.

The first passage that describes covering involving a man is the case of the leper in Leviticus 13:45.

And the leper in whom the plague is, his clothes shall be rent, and his head bare, and he shall put a covering upon his upper lip, and shall cry, Unclean, unclean.

The context of this passage describes a man with leprosy on his head or his forehead, which caused his hair to fall out entirely or partly. A man would have naturally tried to cover that shame up with a shawl, but this passage describes the priest uncovering the man’s head to expose his leprosy.

The word translated “bare” is פּרע or parah, which means “to uncover or to make bare.” It is interesting here that parah has the same essential meaning as gahlaw in Isaiah, except that parah has no sense of being a shameful uncovering. This means that the uncovered man’s head was not nudity like in Isaiah, but rather an uncovering as a proclamation of that man’s status. Note that the man is not shaving his head here, but rather merely uncovering his head (the man would be foolish to shave his head, since his hair could prove that he does not have leprosy!)

Several passages of Scripture discuss men covering their heads.

2 Samuel 15:30 And David went up by the ascent of mount Olivet, and wept as he went up, and had his head covered, and he went barefoot: and all the people that was with him covered every man his head, and they went up, weeping as they went up.

Esther 6:12 And Mordecai came again to the king's gate. But Haman hasted to his house mourning, and having his head covered.

Jeremiah 14:3-4 And their nobles have sent their little ones to the waters: they came to the pits, and found no water; they returned with their vessels empty; they were ashamed and confounded, and covered their heads. Because the ground is chapt, for there was no rain in the earth, the plowmen were ashamed, they covered their heads.

The common thread of these passages is that a man covered his head in the Old Testament out of shame and mourning. There was also a commandment that the priests entering into the temple wear a bonnet before the Lord.

Exodus 28:40 And for Aaron's sons thou shalt make coats, and thou shalt make for them girdles, and bonnets shalt thou make for them, for glory and for beauty.

It is my opinion that these bonnets were the beginning of the custom of Jewish men covering their heads with a kippah, and also later the reason why Roman Catholic priests (cardinals, etc) wear bonnets (though this is in disobedience to 1 Corinthians 11:1-16; This stems from the false teaching of Augustine that the Old Covenant—that is, the physical Old Kingdom--is to be lived out by the church. That is a completely separate topic, however, and beyond the scope of this study.)

What can we conclude from this? In the Old Testament, men covered their heads out of a sense of shame or mourning. The priests were also called to cover their heads both out of a sense of mourning (since after all the priests were going to atone for the sins of Israel), though like the other garments of the priest their bonnets were beautiful. Women on the other hand wore veils to cover their beauty and their identity. It is plain and obvious that men wore a literal cloth on their heads, and that women covered with a literal cloth covering.

Let’s enter into the New Testament. A study of the New Testament will show that the only passage in which the words “cover” and “head” coincide is in 1 Corinthians 11:1-16. There are, however, a few times where the English word “cover” is used in other contexts in the New Testament.

Matthew 8:24 And, behold, there arose a great tempest in the sea, insomuch that the ship was covered with the waves: but he was asleep.

The Greek word here translated “covered” is καλύπτω, or kalupto. This word means simply “to cover,” though not wholly. The image is that the waves were splashing up and over the ship, although the ship was not brought under water.

Matthew 10:26 (repeated in Luke 12:2) Fear them not therefore: for there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known.

This word “covered” is also kalupto. It is a very rich meditation to think how we as sinful humans attempt to cover our own sin, but as the word implies, we can never cover it fully—only the Lord’s own blood can do that!

Mark 14:65 And some began to spit on him, and to cover his face, and to buffet him, and to say unto him, Prophesy: and the servants did strike him with the palms of their hands.

The word here is περικαλύπτω, or perikalupto. The word means literally “to cover all around,” or to cover the surface of something entirely like with a blindfold. You can imagine how the soldiers must have covered up our Lord’s face with their hands.

Luke 8:16 No man, when he hath lighted a candle, covereth it with a vessel, or putteth it under a bed; but setteth it on a candlestick, that they which enter in may see the light.

Again the word here is kalupto. Jesus is saying here that we shouldn’t cover up the glory of God even partly—we should let His light shine out from us fully, in all its glory!

Luke 23:30 Then shall they begin to say to the mountains, Fall on us; and to the hills, Cover us.

What is interesting is that once more the word “cover” is kalupto. I would imagine that a hill falling upon a man would be an entire covering, but the Lord can see through that pile of dust into the man’s never-dying soul!

1 Peter 4:8 And above all things have fervent charity among yourselves: for charity shall cover the multitude of sins.

Do you know what that word translated “cover” is? It’s kalupto! That word that means to cover incompletely! What Peter is discussing here is that we should have love toward one another and forgive each other in love (because that love will blind us toward others’ transgressions toward us). Yet our love for each other does not erase others’ sins, and even God’s love toward us does not erase our sins if we do not turn to Him in repentance, and if He does not forgive us. Think on that for a while, and praise the Lord for His salvation if He has and is saving you!

This brings us to 1 Corinthians 11:1-16. Before we delve into this passage, I’d like to define all of the words thus far used in conjunction with covering as a recap.

Hebrew:
kasah--to cover in entirety
taseef--to wrap over like a veil
gahlaw--to uncover shamefully
parah--to uncover or make bare

Greek:
Peri—all around the edges, as in perimeter
Kata—entirely, the whole of a thing
Kalupto—to cover incompletely

Katakalupto would then mean to cover completely. Kasah is the direct equivalent of katakalupto. One new word used in 1 Corinthians 11 is bolaion, which means something that is cast about. The word bolaion is used as parabolaion (meaning something cast about something else) in the parts of the passage where hair is discussed; in every other place, the word is katakalupto. Do keep this in mind, because it is important that the hair is represented as parabolaion and the other “covering” is represented as katakalupto.

I am going to go through the verses 1 Corinthians 11 that discuss covering and hair, replacing the words “cover” and also interpreting some of the passage in the light of their Greek meaning. This is not because the Bible’s presentation of this passage is deficient—it is not!—but rather because doing this can clarify some of the issues that have been contended over.

Every man praying or prophesying, having something on his head that covers it continually brings dishonor to his head. But every woman that continues to pray or continues to prophesy who does not have the entirety of her head—that is, the area where her hair is that can be grasped--covered continually brings dishonor to her head: it is just as shameful as if she were bald. For if the woman will not entirely cover her head, her head should be shaved: but since it is shameful for a woman to be baldheaded, the woman should entirely cover her head. For a man indeed ought to have his head completely bare, forasmuch as he is the likeness and representative of God on earth: but the woman is the one who draws attention to the man and is a symbol of man’s power and authority. For this cause ought the woman to have a token of the man’s delegated control to her on her head, because of the angels. Use your reasoning: is it comely that a woman pray unto God without her head entirely covered, without that symbol of the veiling of man’s authority in God’s presence? Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, which is cast down his body, it is a shame unto him? But if a woman have long flowing tresses, cast down her body, it will bring attention to her: for God gave woman her hair to be cast about her body (as Eve was given hair in the Garden before the Fall and before God clothed them with clothing).

I think that interpreting the passage in the light of the Greek words clears up the misunderstandings about verses 14-16. It is clear that the hair was given from God as a covering before the Fall (God was concerned about headship even when man was naked!), and then clothing (including a woman’s cloth headcovering) was given after the Fall. The relationship between God, man, and woman was perfect in Eden, but when sin entered in, the relationship was severed, and man’s nakedness was uncovered. He rose up in pride against God, seeking his own authority in disobeying the Lord’s commandment. Thus now that Christ has come to restore us to God, we should seek to hide man’s authority and his pride. As a symbol of this, man should uncover his head (the symbol of God’s glory) and woman should cover her head (the symbol of man’s glory and her own glory). A woman’s hair, therefore, is not the covering that this passage is introducing. Rather, it is a natural symbol of submission that in the light of the Fall should be covered by a voluntary symbol of submission. That really opens this passage up to such deep levels, doesn’t it?

Love in Christ,

Sarah

1. This passage for some is a point of contention. They argue that since Rebekah was not wearing a covering at all times, that whatever the covering is in the New Testament does not need to be worn at all times. The answer to this is that in the Old Testament, there was no broad commandment for women to veil their heads in any way (with hair or with a literal cloth veiling). What Rebekah did was a reflection of the culture in which she lived where there was no teaching from the Bible on covering. Women covered before men out of modesty (the exceptions would be before family and before eunuchs). In the New Testament, the cultural practice of women covering their heads (though it was not a universal practice among any cultural group to whom Paul was writing) was imbued with spiritual significance and made universal and timeless.

"If any man seem to be contentious..."

2009-03-18T18:05:00.000-07:00

Hello, dear readers! I wanted to share with you all something the Lord has taught me. It was prompted partly by the recent discussion on the headcovering. I was curious how we should interpret verse 16 of 1 Corinthians 11, which reads, "But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God." I was praying about it, and the Lord revealed these verses in Romans:

"To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life: But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile; But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile..." Romans 2:7-10

Wow, well, that sums it up quite nicely, doesn't it? Many, many people twist and wrest 1 Corinthians 11 (and yea the entire Bible!) to avoid obeying the clear commands of Scripture, and in so doing, they speak their own damnation (I do want to be clear, however, that there are some who in Godly sincerity interpret this passage differently than I do. I am not condemning these dear brethren. I rather am condemning those who willfully disobey, hiding behind a curtain of excuses for their worldly disobedience. Please understand that difference). If we are contentious, we are displaying our disobedience and indeed our hatred for the righteous demands of God. We also are fully deserving of God's indignation and wrath. We should think on this, brothers and sisters. A person who will not obey the Scriptures is a person who will not receive the blessing and peace of God. That should establish our hearts and minds in gravity.

This little portion of Scripture has actually opened up a new issue in my mind: namely, are we unconditionally eternally secure, or can our genuine salvation be lost? I can sense some eyebrows going up at that question! I am going to put my other writing on hold for a while and work out this issue. I will say upfront that it honestly does not matter if one can lose his or her salvation or not; what is important is that we are saved and that we persevere in the works that God has ordained for us to walk in. Nevertheless, God has been opening my eyes to this issue, and I feel pressed to research it. :) I am so glad when God does that. It grows my life immensely!

Love in Christ,

Sarah

1 Corinthians 11: The Visual Version!

2009-02-26T15:48:00.000-08:00

:) Hi, everyone! Since I am a very visually oriented person, and I assume many of you are, too, I wanted to put together a little visual representation of 1 Corinthians 11. Specifically, I want to cover why hair is not the covering spoken of in this passage.

Say hello to my assistant, Magdalene.

Magdalene is going to help me to go through verses 5 and 6 of 1 Corinthians 11 and see whether or not our hair is our only covering.

"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. For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered."

Okay, let's first try this with the hair as the covering.

If Magdalene is not covered with hair...

...she must also be shorn, or have her hair cut short. Wow, she's pretty bald. I'm not sure how you'd cut her hair, since she doesn't have a single one on her head!

Let's try it another way, this time interpreting this "covering" as a physical cloth veiling on Magdalene's head.

If Magdalene refuses to wear a covering...

...let her also be shorn...

But since it's shameful for Magdalene to have her hair cut short or shaven off...

...she should wear a covering!

Wow, that makes sense, doesn't it?

Love in Christ,

Sarah

PS I thought about doing a "long hair is the covering" example, too, but it's really unnecessary. If Magdalene's long hair is her covering, and she "be not covered" with long hair (i.e., she has short hair), she is already shorn and can't be shorn again. How would you cut short hair to make it short hair? It's already short hair!

Covered in Harmony: Why the Bible demands a literal cloth veiling for women

2009-02-21T11:27:00.000-08:00

Hi, everyone! Most of you dear readers know that I cover my head with a literal cloth veiling out of obedience to 1 Corinthians 11:1-16. I have posted before about the covering, but I feel lead to discuss my reasons why and to refute some objections to covering. Some of this is taken from my old, abandoned blog, so don’t be surprised if the wording sounds familiar :)

1 Corinthians 11:1-16 (King James Version)

1Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.

2Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.

3But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

4Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.

5But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.

6For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.

7For 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.

8For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man.

9Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.

10For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.

11Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.

12For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God.

13Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?

14Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?

15But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.

16But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.

Let's look at the principle of headship first, since that's really what the veiling represents:

Verses 1 and 2 state that people should follow Paul's example of faith and piety in all things (I don’t know a single Christian who wouldn’t want to follow a man with a testimony as incredible as Paul’s.) This means all things, including things we don't necessarily want to do or things that are out of style in society. It's also strange to think that the second half of this passage, which covers The Lord's Supper (or The Holy Communion), is never thought of as "out of date" or "only pertaining to the Corinthians/the early Church/everyone but today. Selah (think about it).
Verse 3 states something that sounds a little odd: There is a divine order both on earth and in heaven. God is above Christ, who is above man, who is above woman. Does this sound strange to you, like woman is inferior to man? Well, let's think about it. Does this mean woman is inferior to man? No! Is Christ inferior to God? What this really means is a man's job is to love and serve his wife as Christ loves and serves His Church (and think about it--Christ died for the Church! It's not at all a situation for a man to be lazy and use his wife as a footstool!)! A woman, in turn, is to graciously submit to her husband's (or father's, if she isn't married) headship--just as the Church is to submit to Christ.
Verses 8 and 9 echo this--woman was created from and for man. Eve was created for Adam, since Adam was incomplete and needed a helper! This doesn't sound like slavery and drudgery.This is honor, this is the completeness I believe many women are searching for today. Verses 11 and 12 reinforce that it is an equality of worth, and yet a difference in role and order.

What can we conclude from this? Precisely what verse 13 says! Think about it: If a woman is to submit to her husband, should she not wear a symbol of this submission as God requires? Let's look at the part of the passage that deals with this:

Verses 4-7 say a couple of things:

A man's glory is the woman, while a woman's glory is her hair. In addition, man is the glory of God.

First, let's explore the idea that a man's glory is his wife. Think about it: a man has to care for his wife as Christ cares for the Church, washing her and caring for her in virtue and purity. Think of the deep and passionate love a man has for his wife. A man's first priority should be to his wife. In addition, a man can be brought great attention by his wife, especially if she is beautiful.
Now let’s explore the fact that a woman’s hair is her glory. Well, it's a little weird to think about at first. Nevertheless, if we think about it, it makes a lot of sense. Women today wear their hair down and flowing, with so much stuff in it to try to make themselves beautiful (though true beauty is in the heart). They try to glorify themselves by making their hair beautiful (to"glorify" in the Bible refers to drawing attention to something--we glorify God by bringing our attention to Him). Sisters, it is blasphemy to take away glory from God, and yet professing Christians do it every day! (I speak this in love and not in condemnation of anyone)
It's also been a traditional symbol of femininity and grace for a woman to have long hair. Women began to abandon this--and the covering--thus abandoning their traditional glory.

In addition, man is the glory of God. Man was the crowning achievement of the Creation. Man's head is God--he is under direct authority of the Lord.

Because of all of this--man being God's glory, and woman being man's glory, there should be a symbolic covering or lack thereof for man and woman.
Verses 4 and 7 show that a man should uncover his head before God. Jewish men wore prayer shawls and caps before the coming of Christ. Now, this is obsolete. The Glory of God has come, so man should uncover that glory.
This means no yarmulkes, prayer shawls, or anything religious on the head. It also means no hats when you're praying, brothers! Our society more or less understands this--usually men will take off their hats in church, although as this passage is being ignored, some men wear hats in church. I can't tell you how this makes me cringe!
Verses 5 and 6 show that a woman should cover her head before God. It's a harder thing to accept than the uncovering of the man, but it's equally true. We are to cover our glory,and man's glory (our bodies and our selves, in modest dress and demeanor).A woman has her own glory—her hair--and is a glory in herself. Like we established, a woman is man's glory, and her hair is her own glory. Therefore, a woman should be covered in modest dress and behavior, and her head and the bulk of her hair should be covered. A woman should be dressed modestly (a topic we shall cover soon), and a woman should cover her head in a gesture symbolic of the meaning of the covering.

But what is that covering? This question has plagued Christianity with arguments for decades. There are several arguments:

Her hair.

Her long hair.

A specific type of covering mandated by a church or denomination (i.e., the Mennonite prayer caps, etc).
A veil that replicates the covering during Corinthian times (i.e., a heavy linen veiling that covers most of the hair but is just laid over it)
Any scarf or hat that acts as a sufficient covering

The covering needs to merely be a “sign”
The covering needs to cover and to be a sign

If the hair is the covering:

How is a woman’s glory covered if her glory is her covering? Why would God command us to cover if the covering would just draw more attention to us away from God?
If hair is the covering, men need to shave their heads every time they pray. I’ve yet to see anyone who argues,“My hair is my covering” argue also that her husband needs to be shaven.
If hair is the covering, verse five is nonsense. Let’s do a little thinking:

If the hair is the covering, let’s go through verse five replacing “covered” and “shorn” with terms that are more straightforward.

If a woman does not have hair on her head, she must have her hair cut short (shorn means to have your hair cut short, like a sheep, as opposed to being cut completely off, which is the word “shaven”).

Do you see the problem here? If a woman is bald, how do you cut her hair?

Let’s take it one step farther. If the long hair is the covering:

If a woman does not have long hair on her head, she must have her hair cut short.

Do you also see the problem here? If a woman’s hair were already short, how would you go and cut it short?

Since the argument “the long hair is the covering” is a common one, let’s further discuss it.

If long hair is the covering:

The issue of revealing your glory is still unanswered. Long hair is even more glorious and attention-drawing than short hair. The problem is compounded, not solved!
There’s actually no justification for this in the passage. Long hair is spoken of only once, when Paul uses comparison in the natural. He says a woman’s long hair is her natural glory, and then goes on to say that her hair is given her for “a”covering. Just because something is “a” covering does not mean it’s the covering that God wants. Do you remember the fig leaves in the Garden of Eden? Or how about if I were to walk around without clothing, and say, “But my skin is a covering for my body!” That is ridiculous, even though our skin does cover our bodies. What Paul is saying is that women’s hair is a covering given by God to remind us of the voluntary covering that we’re supposed to take onto our heads (and indeed our hearts).

I understand that coverings might draw attention to us because they are unusual in modern society. However, we are called as Christians to dress in a way that will not draw attention to the comely parts of us, like our form, our bodies, or our glorious hair. Once we cover those in a quiet way, it is not our fault if someone’s attention is drawn to us. In fact, that often sparks a conversation with the person or thought within their hearts. We also must be careful, though, of dressing in such a way that is so outlandish that it immediately causes people to look. Wear a simple, modest covering and a simple, modest dress that covers you, and forget about it. Think: Amish no, modest yes. Burka, no, modest yes. At the same time, trendy no, modest yes, and worldly no, modest yes!

I believe that it should be obvious that the hair—long or not—is not the covering mandated in 1 Corinthians 11, although we should also have long hair out of respect for this passage. Before we move on to the other concepts of “covering,” let me say a few words about the argument, “My husband (or father, or pastor) is my covering!” Yes, our authority is a covering for us, and we are to be under their authority. However, it should be obvious by now that the passage is discussing something upon the head, not a metaphorical covering of authority (although we also have that; it again could be compared to the natural hair and the cloth veiling). :) Therefore, unless you want to wear your husband on your head, you need to wear a covering.

I also want to mention that the argument that the covering is not applicable to today is incorrect. This is because:

a.The Bible is timeless, and this like all passages is written to all Christians in every place.

b. Just because our society doesn’t practice covering does not excuse us from the Bible’s commands. Is it OK to cheat on our taxes, get an abortion, dress immodestly, skip fellowship meetings, etc, because society does it? Or to hit closer to home, is it okay to disobey the Word of God just because our Church fellowship does? Think a lot about that. The Bible commands for us to wear a covering, and we must obey God before we obey any other authority.

Since it is evident that a real cloth covering is called for in this passage, what is that covering like? The arguments are:

A specific type of covering mandated by a church or denomination (i.e., the Mennonite prayer caps, etc).
A veil that replicates the covering during Corinthian times (i.e., a heavy linen veiling that covers most of the hair but is just laid over it)
Any scarf or hat that acts as a sufficient covering

The covering needs to merely be a “sign”
The covering needs to actually,literally cover the hair.

I see nothing wrong with a church body choosing to have a uniform style of covering recommended. However, the Bible does not denote a particular style, and so we are not required to wear a Mennonite, Amish, etc covering. However, out of a heart of humility and submission, we should submit to our church leadership if they recommend a style of covering that fulfills the Scriptural requirements (I will discuss this in point two).
Along the same lines of point one, the Bible doesn’t command that we dress in the same way as the Corinthians. However, there are certain principles we are to follow that are given in this passage that I will discuss in point three.
Let’s first discuss the first argument. This is used by groups such as the Apostolic Christian Church, which wear a strip of lace over the head a few inches wide as their coverings. I believe it would also apply to those who wear coverings like bandannas, doilies, or bun covers. The reasons why the covering is not just a “sign” or something that “hints at” a covering are:

The issue of covering your glory is still yet unanswered.
A fashionable or showy covering draws attention back to itself, nullifying any covering that actually happens.
A lace covering by itself draws attention especially to the hair underneath. It shows off more than it covers, literally.
The word translated “covering” for thefirst part of the passage (meaning anywhere where the hair is not mentioned) is the Greek word katakalupto,which basically means to cover hanging down. This is the same word used to describe the Mercy Seat in the Old Testament as being covered all over with gold. A covering should hang down in such a way where it covers our hair to the extent that our glory is destroyed (as in you seem to have very little hair). For this reason, I feel that a covering should cover almost all or all of the hair, and not display a whole bunch of hair orbangs in the front with a veiling perched on the back.

So now we arrive at the final argument: The covering should actually cover the majority of the hair with a literal cloth veiling which hangs down to cover almost all or all of the hair. The covering should do nothing more than cover the head and hair. It should not draw attention back as hair would, which means it should be plain, simple, and functional.

Let’s have some discussion on this! I will also be writing an article on dress in general soon, Lord willing.

:) An update

2009-02-13T20:07:00.000-08:00

Hello, dear friends! It's again been a while since I've updated. I'm not too good at that, especially now when life is so busy. I have just four months until I am graduated from college, and I am praising the Lord for these last few moments.

I have been doing a lot of reading lately, mostly in the area of apologetics. I have researched and set in mind a thorough refutation of macroevolution (the theory that life came from nonliving material, including the "Big Bang," aka Darwinism; as opposed to microevolution, which is compatible with a Biblical worldview and basically means variation within kinds and adaptation to the environment without gaining genetic information). I have studied the history and apologetics of the Bible. I have also studied and been deeply challenged by the history of the early Church (specifically from Jesus' ministry up through 300 AD).

You might ask why I am doing so much research. Simple: The Lord has laid a burden on my heart to reach the lost on my campus for Him. There are some specific people in mind (my dear friend Jay and his roomate, Greg; Jay is a skeptical young man leaning into agnosticism, and Greg is a Mormon), but I feel a general call to begin reaching out to all of the lost around me. Please pray for me to have enough strength to do His will!

My bookshelf lately:

The Evolution Handbook by Vance Ferrell (this is a must-read if you have any questions about evolution. "Emperor Evolution has no clothes!")
New Evidence that Demands a Verdict by Josh McDowell (a wonderful apologetic for the Scriptures)
School of Biblical Evangelism by Ray Comfort (if you want a challenge, you'll find it in this book, as well as the next one)
One Thing You Can't Do in Heaven by Mark Cahill (You will be weeping by the end of this book)
Kingdom That Turned the World Upside Down and Will the Real Heretics Please Stand Up by David Bercot

Love in Christ,

Sarah

Praising the Lord with hands

2009-01-27T18:24:00.000-08:00

(The title comes from a Little Jewel book about a deaf girl and her signing family, called "Talking with Hands".)

Today was my first day back in a signing classroom. My teacher is Deaf and (praise the Lord) insists on a completely signing environment; speaking is forbidden. There were various levels of signing ability in that class, so we were signing simple things: fingerspelling the alphabet, signing numbers 1-100, asking rhetorical questions (a common thing in Deaf conversation, although not used much by advanced signers). About halfway through class, like a warm wave, came a beautiful feeling over me. Signing spoke peace into my heart. I remembered today that the Lord wants me in the Deaf world. I had been questioning where He wanted me, whether He wanted me to teach in the position I have found myself in or not. I praise Him that He confirmed that today. I love American Sign Language, and I love the Lord all the more. Thank you, Jesus!

Love in Christ,

Sarah

Praise the Lord!

2009-01-23T10:43:00.000-08:00

Hello, everyone :)

I have wonderful news. Today I went with a school official around to three different Deaf/Hard-of-hearing programs in different schools. I am praising God to report that I will soon be a substitute teacher at schools within a ten minute drive of my home. What a blessing. Thank you, Jesus!

Love in Christ,

Sarah

A new semester, and Lord willing a promise to update :)

2009-01-22T17:33:00.000-08:00

Hello, everyone! It has been a looong time since I posted, but I do want to begin posting more often (Probably once a week, on Thursdays). I've had a lovely and pleasant winter break, and am preparing for a busy semester! As many of you know, this is my last semester of my senior year in University. I will soon graduate with a degree in Deaf Studies and American Sign Language. It is a blessing! I also by the Hand of God am investigating a substitute teaching position that I was recently offered (out of the blue, after praying that the Lord give me a source of income that would yet allow me to be flexible in schedule). I am very excited for what the Lord is doing in my life!

I have several topics that I am going to be working on to post, Lord willing. I've had a request that I write about my views on family size (birth control, "Quiver Full," etc), and I will start working on that soon, if it please God. I also plan to work on a few other topics ("A simple Gospel matches simple adornment," and others). If you have anything in mind, too, please let me know. I love to research, study, write, and of course discuss! :) I am not God; I am fallible and thus of course open to rebuke and discussion. :)

If the Lord wills I will post again Thursday. Until then, I pray the blessings of God down on your lives. May He draw you closer to Him and lead you to follow in His Way.

Love in Christ,

Sarah

My thoughts on Proposition 8 (California ban on same-sex marriages)

2008-11-08T10:46:00.001-08:00

It should come as no surprise to most of you that I voted for Proposition 8. I believe that homosexuality is a sin, grievous to God and against His order for mankind. To equate a partnership between two homosexual people with a marriage as God intended it is at best laughable and at worst sinful.

I think most of you who supported Prop 8 are religious people: you claim the name of Christ, you proclaim that you believe the Bible completely and wholly, and you want to see the Christian values and virtues written in that Holy Book to be practiced and protected. To you and to me, legally solemnizing homosexual partnerships as “marriage” is offensive and an assault on our values.

It seems nonetheless that for some time, we as a nation have begun to accept perversions in marriage. Like it or not, we’ve all seen an assault on marriage. But my dear brothers and sisters, this assault did not start with the “Gay Pride” movement. It started long before that.

It started when we allowed the concept of marriage to break down.

It started when we ignored Christ’s command that a husband sacrificially love his wife as Christ loved the Church—even to the point of dying for her.

It started when we as a culture failed to realize that a woman has a similar and equally important responsibility—to love, cherish, respect, and submit to her husband as the Church is reverent unto Christ. It started when we failed to recognize the distinct yet vitally important role of woman as helpmate, mother, and keeper at home.

It started when we as a Church began to ignore God’s blessing: children! We began to search for riches, success, even “Christian” success before we would even consider sacrificing ourselves for the “heritage of the Lord.”

The Church itself has become rebellious against God’s Plan. The Church has accepted cold marriages. The Church has ignored the vital role of wives and mothers. The Church has neglected children.

And so the Church, little by little, began to reject God’s Will. We accepted pastors and preachers whose marriages were failing and whose children were in disarray, because they were good speakers and won souls to Christ. We counseled Christian women to enter the workforce—since, after all, she had a responsibility to support the family too, right? We promoted the “Christian” use of birth control. How could we serve God if we had too many children running around? We’re too busy winning souls, right?

Then we started to see families fail, and instead of crying out to God in repentance and for healing, we did the unthinkable. We justified divorce.

Do we wonder why society now is accepting homosexuality? What does marriage mean anymore, to most? Absolutely nothing! It’s about “legal rights,” about seeing your sick spouse in the hospital and taking in insurance money if they die. It’s not about building up a Christian family, about servant leadership and submission to one another! Brothers and sisters, we have lost our vision!

We allowed marriage, a holy union between one man and one woman for life, to be perverted. Yes, we Christians! We have allowed the institution of marriage to pass from the Church to the government. The government has said, “We will formally and legally sanction marriage.” We were okay with it, thinking, “What could it hurt?” Little did we realize that when the government regulates something, it defines and controls it. The government has said, “Divorce is OK.” We fought it, then we tolerated it, then we accepted it, then we did it ourselves! Now the government has said, “Men can marry men! Women can marry women!” We rise up in arms, but will we too soon tolerate it, accept it, do it ourselves?

Brothers and sisters, we must get out of our minds that lie that the government defines marriage. No, brothers and sisters. The Bible defines marriage. The Lord defines marriage!

Tell me, what is marriage to you? Is it your marriage license, your wedding ring? Or is it your fruitful partnership, your godly children, and your growth together with your spouse upward and God-ward?

As Christians, we must shun any assault on a Godly marriage. We must shun homosexual marriage, yes. But we must also shun divorce, shun cold marriages, shun gender blurring, shun the “birth control” mentality. We as a Christian culture must get back to the Biblical view of marriage as between one man, one woman, for life, and for a fruitful marriage. We must learn anew to see marriage as God sees marriage.

Perhaps we as Christians should begin to rethink the government intrusion on marriage, as well. Why is it that the government is allowed to dictate what does and what does not constitute marriage? The Church should be doing this. No, the Bible should be doing this! My thought is that the government should simply get out of the business of marriage altogether. Sound radical? Early America didn’t give out marriage licenses; churches solemnized marriages. Who needs a piece of paper when the Lord of Heaven sanctions your union? Let churches be once more the ones who solemnize marriages. Let the legal benefits of marriage be given in alternate means.

But even if this doesn’t happen, that misses the point. Brothers and sisters, let’s get our minds back on the real goal—glorifying God with our lives and our Bible-sanctioned marriages. Let us fight against anything and everything that contradicts the Bible. Yes, homosexuality is a sin, and we should oppose it and educate our society against it. But the same is true with lying. And with divorce. So to is a lack of compassion toward your fellow sinners. So is forgetting that marriage is supposed to be solely focused on serving the Lord.

Proposition 8 is passed, and it might some day be overturned. Or perhaps not. But we as Christians should have our focus upward, not outward. Let us step up Heavenward and search for the Lord’s will in our lives. Let us preach against sin and build up a many-generation foundation for our lives and for our homes. Let us stop trusting in politicians, in Constitutional amendments and ballot measures, and let us once more trust in the Bible, in the Lord Jehovah. We will never have a Christian America. Let us instead strive for Christian families, Christian marriages, and Christian churches. Let us remember the value of Godly husbands as leaders, as fathers, as providers and protectors. Let us extol the virtues of Godly wives and mothers as helpmeets, as homemakers, as extremely valuable teachers and workers for Christ in their own right—and let us remember that no paycheck can make up for having a Godly mother in the home. Let us once more sing the praises of children, and remember that they are the ultimate gift from God, fearfully and wonderfully made. Brothers and sisters, let us remember that marriage is for life, but most of all, that marriage is for God.

O Lord, have mercy on our nation, I pray. Cleanse the Church from the heinous sin of forgetting Your standards, Your Word, Your ways. Let us remember that You are the One that designed marriage, and that we should learn to see it through Your eyes. Help us once more turn to the Scriptures. Keep our eyes off of the government, off of politics, and on to a vision of a Godly family, a vision of Christ. Bring us, O Lord, to our knees in repentance. Revive Thy Work, O God. Raise up a Godly seed, and heal Your Church and Your people. Thank you, O Lord. For it is in Jesus’ Name I pray, Amen.

;) Hello again!

2008-10-31T18:18:00.000-07:00

Hello, dear readers! I am so sorry about my enormous lag time for posting! College life can be hectic, but praise the Lord midterms are over and I can breathe again :)

I am very slowly coming to the realization of how precious life is. I am twenty years old, looking at the prospect of being married and of being a mother in the next few years. I will soon graduate from college, Lord willing find a husband, and begin a completely new phase of life. I pray that I'm ready for those bumps, be they hardships or unexpected blessings. I covet your prayers!

I am preparing to write a series of posts some topics that are dear to my heart. Stay tuned!

May the Lord Jesus Christ bless you and yours!

Love in Christ,

Sarah

:D It's been a long time!

2008-10-11T18:20:00.000-07:00

Hello, everyone! It's been quite some time since I last posted on this blog. I have been so busy with school that it took the promptings of a dear Mexican sister to remind me that I do indeed have a blog!

It is my goal to give much more regular updates (at least once a week). :) Lord willing I will be able to do this.

I started school in late August, and it is very hectic! All of my classes are taught in American Sign Language, since that is my area of study and since all but one of my teachers are Deaf. I enjoy it immensely even though it is quite difficult.

I also had the privilege of meeting another headcovering young lady. I bet some of you know that thrill too! She and I share the same name, the same age, and many of the same interests. I praise God for having met her.

Life still is quite hectic, but Lord willing I will get myself reorganized soon.

Love in Christ,

Sarah

Curiosity and the Meaning of Life

2008-08-25T19:39:00.001-07:00

My Dad is a science nut. He loves to read science books, watch science TV, and more than anything, talk science with me and my sister. Today we were talking about, among other things, space exploration and the reasons for it. I mentioned to my Dad that I thought the billions and billions of dollars used to explore space could be used for much better purposes (like feeding the hungry, perhaps?) and that really, space exploration is useless. My sister then asked, "Well, what if Columbus hadn't explored the New World?" She went on to say, "I mean, I guess I could live without knowing what space is like" to which my Dad retorted, "Well, I couldn't!"

My father has an insatiable desire to know where we came from, why we're here, where we are going. He's thoroughly convinced (though not so keen to challenges) that we living beings came from dead rock, and that there could be no God; yet he searches for the meaning of life like there's no tomorrow.

My father is like millions of Americans today: searching for meaning in whatever medium (whether like my Dad, in hypothetical science, or like others, in money, in women, in sex, in careers) without giving a second thought to God. He will without question accept the words of any person who has a science degree and wears a lab coat, but my mere contention that Jesus is leads him, just like many others, to call me ignorant and easily convinced.

We're all searching for the truth. I just contend that I have found Him. His name is Jesus. He is the sole Meaning of Life. His Word gives us purpose. And His Word is pure, true, and trustworthy. I challenge you, whatever your call for life, to seek that out for yourself.

Here are some sites to check out:

Jesus claimed to be God, and He claimed to be the only Water that we need to live. It's a claim that must be investigated, and that has a mindboggling amount of proof toward its validity. Seek Him out and ye shall find.

Love in Christ,

Sarah

Coming up next: Is the Bible reliable?

A tract I wrote..."Why do you dress that way?"

2008-06-12T11:17:00.000-07:00

Why do you dress like that?

You might think I’m Mennonite, Amish, a nun, a Muslim, or perhaps someone with cancer.

But I am none of these.

I am a Christian woman who is striving to obey the Bible in every area of my life.

One of the ways I choose to express my faith is in my dress.

Some Important Scripture References:

1 Corinthians 11:1-12 Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ. Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you. But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. 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. For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. 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. 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.
10For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels. Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord. For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God.

Genesis 3:9-11, 21 And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou? And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself. And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat? Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them.

1 Timothy 2:9-10 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.

1 Peter 3:3-4 Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.

Matthew 5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Romans 14:13, 21 Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way. It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.

Deuteronomy 22:5 The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.

Why do I cover my head?
The Bible in 1 Corinthians 11 states that a woman should cover her head out of reverence toward God and out of submission to the authorities in her life. A Christian woman should cover her hair—her glory, that which brings attention to her—so that God’s glory may be revealed. This principle of covering the head is described in many places in the Bible, such as Genesis 24:65 and Isaiah 47:1-4.

The covering is for every Christian woman in every time and place. It is an honor and a blessing!

Why do I dress the way that I do?
Besides my headcovering, you probably also noticed that I wear long dresses and jumpers that are loose and simple. I do this for many reasons.

To cover myself
Genesis 3:9-21 teaches that the main purpose of clothing is to cover us, rather than to be a display of beauty. It also teaches us that God’s standards in all things—clothing included—are best.

For modesty
1 Timothy 2:9-10 teaches that women are to be modest in all things—dress being one small area of that commandment. Women are exhorted to dress modestly and plainly, drawing attention to God and to their quiet spirit instead of their beauty (1 Peter 3:3-4). I also dress in order to avoid any chance of causing men to lust (Matthew 5:28, Romans 14:13, 21).

For gender distinction
The Bible in many places teaches that a woman should only wear clearly feminine clothing, such as Deuteronomy 22:5. In several places in the Bible, pants (also called breeches) are described as a solely male garment (Exodus 28:42, Leviticus 6:10, 16:4), and thus they are not to be worn by women.

For these reasons, I choose to wear long dresses and a headcovering for the glory of God.

The bigger picture

In reality, though, the Christian life is much more than outward appearance. It is a deep knowledge of who God is, what He has done and will do, and what He desires for us to do and be. More than anything, the Christian life is filled with a vital relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ. The Lord desires this close bond with him for all people on earth! Unfortunately, this bond is broken by sin. Without the power of God within us, sin reigns in our lives and cut us off from the glory of God.
Romans 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.

Everyone who is cut off from the Lord will ultimately die, not just physically, but eternally in hell. But the Lord in His infinite mercy has provided us a way out from that eternal punishment.
Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

How can we obtain that beautiful gift of God? Not by doing good things, going to church, giving to charity, or “being a good person.” We’re all sinners, and anything good we can do is like filthy rags before a holy and perfect God.
Isaiah 64:6 But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.

How, then, can we be saved?
Romans 9:9-13 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

Call upon the name of Jesus Christ, confessing your sins, and He will forgive you and make you His child!

Praise the Lord!

From the rising of the sun unto the going down of the same the LORD's name is to be praised. Psalm 113:3

Please feel free to contact me at
coveredtractgirl@yahoo.com

Also, please visit the following websites:
http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/thebible.htm
http://www.livingwaters.com/good
http://www.charityministries.org
http://www.biblicalresearchreports.com/headcovering-today.php
http://www.biblicalresearchreports.com/headcoveringmyths.php

Hello and welcome!

2008-06-08T15:04:00.000-07:00

Hi, everyone! My name is Sarah, and this is my blog. I'm a college student, and a very busy one at that, but I still plan to update my blog at least once a week.

Things to look forward to:
--Thoughts and insights I find daily in books, in people, and in the Bible
--Musings about American Sign Language, Deaf culture, and interpreting
--Insight into my daily life, which can get pretty hectic :D

I hope you find this blog interesting and fulfilling!

Love in Christ,

Sarah