<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Isaiah 47:2 (Misinterpreted Scriptures)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.whyileft.org/frequently-misinterpreted-scriptures/isaiah-472-misinterpreted-scriptures/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.whyileft.org/frequently-misinterpreted-scriptures/isaiah-472-misinterpreted-scriptures/</link>
	<description>Thoughts from the mind of Josh Spiers: Formerly Apostolic Pentecostal, always Christian</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 02:56:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Josh (Site Admin)</title>
		<link>http://www.whyileft.org/frequently-misinterpreted-scriptures/isaiah-472-misinterpreted-scriptures/comment-page-1/#comment-23189</link>
		<dc:creator>Josh (Site Admin)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2012 19:11:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://test.jspiers.org/frequently-misinterpreted-scriptures/isaiah-472-misinterpreted-scriptures/#comment-23189</guid>
		<description>Shephredess,

I appreciate the comments. It&#039;s worth noting that the church in Corinth was composed of both Jews and Gentiles, and that the customs regarding hair coverings in worship were mixed. With some pagan religions the men wore them, with others the women wore them. Sometimes they weren&#039;t worn at all, sometimes they were always worn. There&#039;s also some debate over how the Jews of that era regarding head coverings. I&#039;ve read some commentaries that say Jewish men always wore head coverings in worship and others saying that the custom hadn&#039;t been fully established yet.

Corinth was a port city that attracted a tremendous range of cultures, religions, and gods. Because of that it&#039;s not surprising that there was a division over head coverings. Paul&#039;s commands to them were not based in any particular cultural view, though. He was not defending the culture of the Jews or of the Gentiles. The commands that he gave were not based in the Old Testament law either. Instead, he was laying down a new custom, one that he says all of the churches adhered to. It&#039;s also important to note that he was not saying to not argue over things that have always been, because things had not always been that way. He was telling them that the custom he was instructing them in was taught by all of the early churches, and that they should not be contentious about it.

My complete opinion on the subject, flawed or accurate, can be found here: http://www.whyileft.org/what-does-the-bible-say-about/what-does-the-bible-say-about-hair/

In Christ,
- Josh S.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Shephredess,</p>
<p>I appreciate the comments. It&#8217;s worth noting that the church in Corinth was composed of both Jews and Gentiles, and that the customs regarding hair coverings in worship were mixed. With some pagan religions the men wore them, with others the women wore them. Sometimes they weren&#8217;t worn at all, sometimes they were always worn. There&#8217;s also some debate over how the Jews of that era regarding head coverings. I&#8217;ve read some commentaries that say Jewish men always wore head coverings in worship and others saying that the custom hadn&#8217;t been fully established yet.</p>
<p>Corinth was a port city that attracted a tremendous range of cultures, religions, and gods. Because of that it&#8217;s not surprising that there was a division over head coverings. Paul&#8217;s commands to them were not based in any particular cultural view, though. He was not defending the culture of the Jews or of the Gentiles. The commands that he gave were not based in the Old Testament law either. Instead, he was laying down a new custom, one that he says all of the churches adhered to. It&#8217;s also important to note that he was not saying to not argue over things that have always been, because things had not always been that way. He was telling them that the custom he was instructing them in was taught by all of the early churches, and that they should not be contentious about it.</p>
<p>My complete opinion on the subject, flawed or accurate, can be found here: <a href="http://www.whyileft.org/what-does-the-bible-say-about/what-does-the-bible-say-about-hair/" rel="nofollow">http://www.whyileft.org/what-does-the-bible-say-about/what-does-the-bible-say-about-hair/</a></p>
<p>In Christ,<br />
- Josh S.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: shepherdess</title>
		<link>http://www.whyileft.org/frequently-misinterpreted-scriptures/isaiah-472-misinterpreted-scriptures/comment-page-1/#comment-23174</link>
		<dc:creator>shepherdess</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2012 14:47:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://test.jspiers.org/frequently-misinterpreted-scriptures/isaiah-472-misinterpreted-scriptures/#comment-23174</guid>
		<description>It would behoove you all to get a copy of hebrew scriptures.  The word in YashaYahu 47:2 states veil, not lock.  The hebrew word here is the word meaning covering or shawl, not &quot;hair&quot; as is the verse in 1 co. 11.  People argue that shaul was speaking about hair being a covering, when in fact he was showing the correlation between the spiritual and the natural, it is by nature that a woman should have long hair, it is spiritual that upon her head should be a covering. The greek word used there means a covering coming down upon, not one that grows out the head.  He is letting them know that women are cover because their esteem is their husbands, but also because of the Messengers.  He goes on to say that it is not to be argued about because it is their custom not to argue over things that has always been.  Remember he was speaking to gentile converts here who were used to adhering to the way of the pagan priestess who were bald or uncovered.  I recommend also a lexicon and a scripture dictionary.  Shalum!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It would behoove you all to get a copy of hebrew scriptures.  The word in YashaYahu 47:2 states veil, not lock.  The hebrew word here is the word meaning covering or shawl, not &#8220;hair&#8221; as is the verse in 1 co. 11.  People argue that shaul was speaking about hair being a covering, when in fact he was showing the correlation between the spiritual and the natural, it is by nature that a woman should have long hair, it is spiritual that upon her head should be a covering. The greek word used there means a covering coming down upon, not one that grows out the head.  He is letting them know that women are cover because their esteem is their husbands, but also because of the Messengers.  He goes on to say that it is not to be argued about because it is their custom not to argue over things that has always been.  Remember he was speaking to gentile converts here who were used to adhering to the way of the pagan priestess who were bald or uncovered.  I recommend also a lexicon and a scripture dictionary.  Shalum!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Justin</title>
		<link>http://www.whyileft.org/frequently-misinterpreted-scriptures/isaiah-472-misinterpreted-scriptures/comment-page-1/#comment-10633</link>
		<dc:creator>Justin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Mar 2011 18:59:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://test.jspiers.org/frequently-misinterpreted-scriptures/isaiah-472-misinterpreted-scriptures/#comment-10633</guid>
		<description>We will see you is standing at the pearly gates and who is looking up from the pit of hell</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We will see you is standing at the pearly gates and who is looking up from the pit of hell</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: wendell</title>
		<link>http://www.whyileft.org/frequently-misinterpreted-scriptures/isaiah-472-misinterpreted-scriptures/comment-page-1/#comment-6135</link>
		<dc:creator>wendell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Oct 2010 22:58:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://test.jspiers.org/frequently-misinterpreted-scriptures/isaiah-472-misinterpreted-scriptures/#comment-6135</guid>
		<description>I think when people begin to love the Lord with all their heart,soul,mind and strength and love their neighbor as their self, then all these other things fall into line; includling dress.          GOD BLESS</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think when people begin to love the Lord with all their heart,soul,mind and strength and love their neighbor as their self, then all these other things fall into line; includling dress.          GOD BLESS</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mel</title>
		<link>http://www.whyileft.org/frequently-misinterpreted-scriptures/isaiah-472-misinterpreted-scriptures/comment-page-1/#comment-5485</link>
		<dc:creator>Mel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Aug 2010 15:13:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://test.jspiers.org/frequently-misinterpreted-scriptures/isaiah-472-misinterpreted-scriptures/#comment-5485</guid>
		<description>What didn&#039;t you people understand.....the author states correctly that the scripture applied to isreal....not to us my believers. This is a prime example that we have Christians who are biblically illiterate and imposing legalistic requirements in the name of scripture. We must be skilled at interpreting and understanding scripture before we look to hold people and even ourselves accountable to it</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What didn&#8217;t you people understand&#8230;..the author states correctly that the scripture applied to isreal&#8230;.not to us my believers. This is a prime example that we have Christians who are biblically illiterate and imposing legalistic requirements in the name of scripture. We must be skilled at interpreting and understanding scripture before we look to hold people and even ourselves accountable to it</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jerry simmons</title>
		<link>http://www.whyileft.org/frequently-misinterpreted-scriptures/isaiah-472-misinterpreted-scriptures/comment-page-1/#comment-3842</link>
		<dc:creator>jerry simmons</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 May 2010 07:35:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://test.jspiers.org/frequently-misinterpreted-scriptures/isaiah-472-misinterpreted-scriptures/#comment-3842</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m in the UPC. I don&#039;t wear knee length shorts but I really don&#039;t think there is scripture against it. The only scripture I recall in my studies on this was regarding the modesty of the priesthood. They wore knee length shorts under their robes to cover their body for modesty purposes. The robes themselves went to the ankles. No matter what position the priest found themselves, their body was covered at least to the knee. The tradition of a minimum of to the knee length modesty I believe is derived from this scripture. Some standards of the upc are based on openly known tradition of the founding leaders, but the standard of pants and skirts having a minimum length of just below the knee seems scripturally accurate. Wouldn&#039;t it make good sense if we know God is displeased with inmodest dress to establish a guideline for the church if issues arise in the church. Paul did this many times in the epistles.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m in the UPC. I don&#8217;t wear knee length shorts but I really don&#8217;t think there is scripture against it. The only scripture I recall in my studies on this was regarding the modesty of the priesthood. They wore knee length shorts under their robes to cover their body for modesty purposes. The robes themselves went to the ankles. No matter what position the priest found themselves, their body was covered at least to the knee. The tradition of a minimum of to the knee length modesty I believe is derived from this scripture. Some standards of the upc are based on openly known tradition of the founding leaders, but the standard of pants and skirts having a minimum length of just below the knee seems scripturally accurate. Wouldn&#8217;t it make good sense if we know God is displeased with inmodest dress to establish a guideline for the church if issues arise in the church. Paul did this many times in the epistles.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Melodi</title>
		<link>http://www.whyileft.org/frequently-misinterpreted-scriptures/isaiah-472-misinterpreted-scriptures/comment-page-1/#comment-2404</link>
		<dc:creator>Melodi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 20:35:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://test.jspiers.org/frequently-misinterpreted-scriptures/isaiah-472-misinterpreted-scriptures/#comment-2404</guid>
		<description>In 1 corinthians 11, we are told that a womans long hair is given to her for a covering, the use of a veil here is nullified by a womans long hair. It is a shame for a woman to pray uncovered, her hair being her covering, and here the city was being shamed by uncovering her locks, so these two passages, in the old and new testament agree, as all the bible does. There are many scriptures on modesty, but none of them seem to be specific. The UPC sometimes goes off of this verse and sometimes off of the &quot;tradition of modesty&quot; however in both cases, in this verse and in a traditional sense, modesty meant to cover the whole leg, not just the thigh. I was raised in the church all my life, and bucked against it until about a year ago, when i finally grew up. At 17 I committed my entire life to God to do what he would with me. In doing this, I also have asked God to convict me of anything I might be doing wrong, and it was very odd, because I began to feel more and more uncomfortable in the clothes I was wearing, cap sleeves began to feel skimmpy and knee length a bit short. I know that I cannot base my walk with God, or my convictions on feeling, and everything is written in Gods word. Yes it does say to be modest, but I wasnt sure exactly what that meant. But I read this scripture and it spoke to me, it was one of those times when you read the bible, and something that you have read a million times seems to jump out at you like it never did. I since have made a commitment to wear loose skirts that cover my entire leg. No the bible never says showing your leg is an abomination or a sin, and it only uses showing your leg as a shame to a lady here, but I believe it pleases God when we, in our weak, often missunderstanding human way, try to please him in our lifestyle. I am not condeming anyone who shows their leg, or their thigh, or anything, but I know in myself that this is right. Traditionally, and from this, biblically, this is right, and this is what I am going to do because of my commitment to Jesus, and because I want him to know, that I would give up anything, and I would go to any lengths to praise him, and love him, and worship him. Even to floor length.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In 1 corinthians 11, we are told that a womans long hair is given to her for a covering, the use of a veil here is nullified by a womans long hair. It is a shame for a woman to pray uncovered, her hair being her covering, and here the city was being shamed by uncovering her locks, so these two passages, in the old and new testament agree, as all the bible does. There are many scriptures on modesty, but none of them seem to be specific. The UPC sometimes goes off of this verse and sometimes off of the &#8220;tradition of modesty&#8221; however in both cases, in this verse and in a traditional sense, modesty meant to cover the whole leg, not just the thigh. I was raised in the church all my life, and bucked against it until about a year ago, when i finally grew up. At 17 I committed my entire life to God to do what he would with me. In doing this, I also have asked God to convict me of anything I might be doing wrong, and it was very odd, because I began to feel more and more uncomfortable in the clothes I was wearing, cap sleeves began to feel skimmpy and knee length a bit short. I know that I cannot base my walk with God, or my convictions on feeling, and everything is written in Gods word. Yes it does say to be modest, but I wasnt sure exactly what that meant. But I read this scripture and it spoke to me, it was one of those times when you read the bible, and something that you have read a million times seems to jump out at you like it never did. I since have made a commitment to wear loose skirts that cover my entire leg. No the bible never says showing your leg is an abomination or a sin, and it only uses showing your leg as a shame to a lady here, but I believe it pleases God when we, in our weak, often missunderstanding human way, try to please him in our lifestyle. I am not condeming anyone who shows their leg, or their thigh, or anything, but I know in myself that this is right. Traditionally, and from this, biblically, this is right, and this is what I am going to do because of my commitment to Jesus, and because I want him to know, that I would give up anything, and I would go to any lengths to praise him, and love him, and worship him. Even to floor length.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jade</title>
		<link>http://www.whyileft.org/frequently-misinterpreted-scriptures/isaiah-472-misinterpreted-scriptures/comment-page-1/#comment-2144</link>
		<dc:creator>Jade</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2009 03:14:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://test.jspiers.org/frequently-misinterpreted-scriptures/isaiah-472-misinterpreted-scriptures/#comment-2144</guid>
		<description>This scripture doesn&#039;t take a genius to read! I think people try to overanalyze too much! It means exactly what it says! U don&#039;t see a man walking around in dresses, therefore dresses identify with women! It has nothing to do with shorts, but men identify with pants! It leaves no gender confussion!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This scripture doesn&#8217;t take a genius to read! I think people try to overanalyze too much! It means exactly what it says! U don&#8217;t see a man walking around in dresses, therefore dresses identify with women! It has nothing to do with shorts, but men identify with pants! It leaves no gender confussion!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: What does the Bible say about men wearing shorts? &#124; whyileft.org</title>
		<link>http://www.whyileft.org/frequently-misinterpreted-scriptures/isaiah-472-misinterpreted-scriptures/comment-page-1/#comment-6</link>
		<dc:creator>What does the Bible say about men wearing shorts? &#124; whyileft.org</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Nov 2007 21:23:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://test.jspiers.org/frequently-misinterpreted-scriptures/isaiah-472-misinterpreted-scriptures/#comment-6</guid>
		<description>[...] have already discussed this passage in my article on Misinterpreted Scriptures, so in this article I am simply going to repeat the material that I have already written in that [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] have already discussed this passage in my article on Misinterpreted Scriptures, so in this article I am simply going to repeat the material that I have already written in that [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

