Why did Christian women stop covering their head?

It's not a Bible school. They don't believe the authority of Scripture as the Word of God. They're the ones Jesus talked about as having an appearance of Godliness, but denying the power.

 

Christian's like me believe that the Protestant Bible is the total Word of God.

 

You mean like some backwoods "Bible school"? LOLOL No Yale Divinity School is far more than that.

Graduate divinity schools combine theological study with fieldwork in congregations, hospitals, and local communities to prepare students to become ministers, chaplains, and church leaders. Some undergraduate degrees are also available in field related to divinity.

Many national and regional schools that are ranked highly by U.S. News & World Report have divinity schools or programs, including Harvard University, the University of Chicago, and Abilene Christian University.

 

They don't believe in the authority and power of Scripture. They're pretenders.

 

You could say that sexism came from the creator who had the nerve to create

In free societies some women choose to wear clothing considered modest according to them. Amish women choose to wear caps and dresses. Some penacostal women choose long sleeves. Some catholic women choose to show modesty and respect to God by wearing a veil in church. Lots of choices and to assume women in free societies are too weak to choose differently is sad.

 

Agree. Clothing is a cultural thing, not a command of God.

 

What Protestant denomination would that be?

 

They are educated.... not pretenders.

 

No, sexism, like it's counterpart racism, was a creation of humans....ignorant humans.

If it's a CHOICE fine, if it's "women must obey different rules because they are female" it is wrong, backwards, and ignorant..

 

Most cultures have some sort of expectation... Why is this such an issue?

 

Nondenominational. There are many nondenominational Bible schools and churches.

 

They're not educated on Scriptures and the authority of Scripture. They're taught to believe worldly interpretations and deny the power of God's word.

 

What denomination is that?

I attended a non denominational Protestant Church for 14 years and they sure weren't ignorant.

 

It's a sign of modesty. Kind of similar to women not running around naked, but taken to a little more of an extreme.
Think the Pilgrim women with their bonnets.

Geesh, these days it seems women want to go around in public topless with their breasts flapping in the breeze and be outraged if any man is staring at them.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
No, sexism, like it's counterpart racism, was a creation of humans....ignorant humans.


If it's a CHOICE fine, if it's "women must obey different rules because they are female" it is wrong, backwards, and ignorant..

As I posted : ""If it's a CHOICE fine, if it's "women must obey different rules because they are female" it is wrong, backwards, and ignorant.


It isn't an issue with me since the women I know all do as they damn please ...and they KNOW they don't need to fulfill anyone's "expectations" of how females should dress..

 

Why do women have to be modest but not men?

 

Try walking naked down Main Street to exercise your freedom of choice.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
FoxHastings said: ↑
No, sexism, like it's counterpart racism, was a creation of humans....ignorant humans.


If it's a CHOICE fine, if it's "women must obey different rules because they are female" it is wrong, backwards, and ignorant..




As I posted : ""If it's a CHOICE fine, if it's "women must obey different rules because they are female" it is wrong, backwards, and ignorant.


It isn't an issue with me since the women I know all do as they damn please ...and they KNOW they don't need to fulfill anyone's "expectations" of how females should dress..

I didn't expect this from you.....do you really think there is only two choices, naked or wrapped up head to toe in obedience to MAN made "rules" ?????

 

Just saying that every culture has expectations for men and women. I had an Italian grandmother whack me with her umbrella because I was sleeveless outside the Vatican.

 

Then you can tell me why the Bible says that Joseph took Mary and Jesus to Egypt until Herod died,(Matthew) Yet Luke tells us that Joseph took Jesus back to Nazareth 40 days. after his birth, and they stayed there until Jesus was 12. That puts Joseph and Mary in both places at once. Jesus was born around 5 BCE Herod died 4 BCE. . .
40 days? Leviticus 12.

 

Ouch. You should have been whipped and scourged. Corporal Mortification - Opus Dei style. Er. Perhaps not

 

@Migrunt

LOLOL.. Matthew was fiddling with scripture and taking Hosea out of context.

 

LOL.. I didn't know any better nor why she hit me.

 

Most of his Nativity storey is the same. No massacre, no wise men, no stable, no inn. Villages didn't have inns. As ypu know if any traveller needed shelter or food, he would wait in the centre and a villager would offer what was needed - down to an overnight bed. Jesus was in the village centre - the well - because he wanted a drink. And the 'woman at the well' followed the custom.
How can anyone possibly state that the 'star of Bethlehem' was such and such, when we don't even know when Jesus was born.

Lukes nativity story is just as bad. It goes against all the Roman and Jewish laws of the time. Not only that but if you follow the story through you end up with the whole world in chaos and at least tens of thousands of Davids descendants all arriving at a small village at the same time. Well, virtually all wouldn't actually get anywhere near Bethlehem. David had at least 20 sons and had been dead 1000 years. If you believe the story of David his family would have been enormous. Given that the census was for tax purposes on property the whole story is ridiculous. If all these descendants had property in Bethlehem, it would have been at least 10 times the size of Jerusalem.

I'm off to bed. Have a good day.

 

Thanks, Trevor.. I enjoy your posts so much.