Truth.8 posted on 21-4-2014 02:32 PM
are you saying muslims has so many sects do not agreed each other? how sure that u are wrong and his is right?
When did I say that muslims have many sects and all not agreeable with one another? You are just arguing from your own 'syok sendiri' imagination. Farting thru your mouth or what?
My argument of head covering in Quran24:31 has the references of arabic dictionaries and the opinions of scholars. However your argument is just based on the unlearned opinions of polemicists and / or Quranists. This is very poor of you. If these people tell you to eat shit , are you going to eat shit and then claim it taste good?
Per your post #112
(1) How do you come to the understanding that us muslims understand hijab = head cover? Nobody stated so
(2) Look at your post #101 , is there a bracket between the word 'head cover'? Yes or no?
(3) Where is the reference of the article that confirm 'khimar' is not head cover? There is no authoritative reference
Can you provide the authoritative source(s) that the word 'khimar' in Quran24:31
sam1528 posted on 21-4-2014 05:41 PM
When did I say that muslims have many sects and all not agreeable with one another? You are just a ...
than how you expalin most of this nmuslims include the scholar says wearing head covering is not in quran?? u must remember this peoples are arab and their mother language is arab...u are not...so dont act smart that you know the quran well...
Truth.8 posted on 21-4-2014 10:23 PM
than how you expalin most of this nmuslims include the scholar says wearing head covering is not in quran?? u must remember this peoples are arab and their mother language is arab...u are not...so dont act smart that you know the quran well...
Most of muslims and a scholar? Quranites are just insignificant minority and who is this so called scholar?
Why are you going around in circles chasing your own backside? You have yet to provide your evidence. Unless you are 'syok sendiri' type of person or you are mentally challenged you need to start providing evidence of your argument.
Who are these people , the so called know their mother tongue? You have nothing. Even simple questions you are so scared to answer because you don't have an answer.
The fact is that I know more than you.
Per your post #112
(1) How do you come to the understanding that us muslims understand hijab = head cover? Nobody stated so
(2) Look at your post #101 , is there a bracket between the word 'head cover'? Yes or no?
(3) Where is the reference of the article that confirm 'khimar' is not head cover? There is no authoritative reference
Can you provide the authoritative source(s) that the word 'khimar' in Quran24:31
does not mean headcover?
Why so scared to answer? Last edited by sam1528 on 21-4-2014 11:58 PM
sam1528 posted on 21-4-2014 11:57 PM
Most of muslims and a scholar? Quranites are just insignificant minority and who is this so called ...
are u saying those arabs who spoke and write which is their mother language is better than u? u not arab...
so, the arabs who is muslim says covering head is not according to quran..
Truth.8 posted on 22-4-2014 10:55 AM
are u saying those arabs who spoke and write which is their mother language is better than u? u not arab...
so, the arabs who is muslim says covering head is not according to quran..
why you in denial??
Ha ha , 'truth.8' asking questions that have been answered. You might as well call yourself 'retard.8' looking at the way you are arguing and asking questions that have been answered. Go back and read my posts #137 and #139.
Somehow or rather you are so scared answering questions. Wonder why?
Per your post #112
(1) How do you come to the understanding that us muslims understand hijab = head cover? Nobody stated so
(2) Look at your post #101 , is there a bracket between the word 'head cover'? Yes or no?
(3) Where is the reference of the article that confirm 'khimar' is not head cover? There is no authoritative reference
Can you provide the authoritative source(s) that the word 'khimar' in Quran24:31
sam1528 posted on 22-4-2014 12:50 PM
Ha ha , 'truth.8' asking questions that have been answered. You might as well call yourself 'retar ...
you still in denial:
are u saying those arabs who spoke and write which is their mother language is better than u? u not arab...
so, the arabs who is muslim says covering head is not according to quran..
meaning u are fraud and liar
Here I post another PhD who is arab ...do not agreed on hijab or the head covering....u not a phd and arab decendant ....so the issue on hijab and head covering is not God commandement..here is the link:
Morocco World News
Casablanca, June 24, 2012
Last month at Al Azhar University, Sheikh Mustapha Mohamed Rashed defended a thesis that sparked a heated debate among religious scholars. The candidate concluded that Hijab, or the veil, is not an Islamic duty.
The claim is not the first of its kind, but the mere fact that it is adopted in Al Azhar University – the Sunni Islam’s foremost seat of learning –makes it controversial.
Sheikh Mustapha Mohamed Rashed argued that Hijab is not an Islamic duty. He stated that Hijab refers to the cover of the head, which is not mentioned in the Holy Quran at all. “Nonetheless, a bunch of scholars insisted vehemently that the veil is both an Islamic duty and one of the most important pillars of Islam,” he added.
In doing so, the PhD candidate points out, “they deviated from the purposes of the Islamic law and “Sahih Atafsir” or the true interpretation. They rejected reasoning and relied only on literal text.”
According to Mohamed Rashed, these scholars de-contextualized the verses of the Quran and interpreted them in their very own liking, following some ancient scholars, as if what they said is sacred and is no subject to Ijtihad.
Ijtihad is a technical term, which literally means “exertion” in a jurisprudential sense; it is the exertion of mental energy by a Muslim jurist to deduce legal rulings from Islam’s sacred texts.1
The researcher continued that the scholars, who claim that Hijab is an important pillar of Islam, departed from “Al Minhaj Assahih,” or the true path, of interpretation and reasoning, which interprets the verses according to their historical context and the causes of revelation. These scholars “interpreted the verses in their general sense, overlooking the causes of their revelation, intentionally or due to their limited intellectual capacity resulted in psychological scourge.” Worse yet, they approached hundreds of important issues in the same way.”
“The supporters of Hijab as an Islamic duty base their arguments on inconsistent and wrong evidence. They would ascribe various meanings to the veil, from Hijab to Khimar to Jalabib, a fact which shows that they digressed from the true meaning they intended to address, the cover of the head,” he added. The researcher attempted to deconstruct the three claims that are derived from interpretations of the sacred texts.
Literally, Hijab means “a veil,” “curtain,” “partition” or “separation.” 2 The verse in which it is mentioned is specifically addressed to the wives of the prophet; there is no dispute among scholars about that at all. The verse states as follow,
And when you ask [his wives] for something, ask them from behind a partition ( hijab). That is purer for your hearts and their hearts. And it is not [conceivable or lawful] for you to harm the Messenger of Allah or to marry his wives after him, ever. Indeed, that would be in the sight of Allah an enormity. ( Quran 33: 53)
The term hijab then is meant to have a partition between the wives of the prophet and his companions. It is not addressed to the Muslim women, otherwise it would have been stated, says Mohamed Rashed.
Bouthaina Shaaban seems to have held the same belief.3She said that those who imitate the wives of the prophet and wear the Hijab are disobeying God’s will, for He said,
O wives of the Prophet, you are not like anyone among women. (Quran 33: 32)
As for the term Khimar, it is found in a verse of the Quran stating,
And tell the believing women to reduce [some] of their vision and guard their private parts and not expose their adornment except that which [necessarily] appears thereof and to wrap [a portion of] their headcovers over their chests. (Quran 24: 31)
The researcher pointed out that the evidence is invalid. The intent of the text is to refer to the cover of the breast whose exposure is un-Islamic, but not to what is perceived nowadays as Hijab for the head.
In this regard, it is believed that when the pre-Islamic Arabs went to battle, Arab women seeing the men off to war would bare their breasts to encourage them to fight; or they would do so at the battle itself, as in the case of the Meccan women led by Hind at the Battle of Uhud.2
Nikkie Keddie, a prominent historian and an expert on women’s issues in Islam, said that this verse does not refer to covering the hair. It was only “later interpreted as meaning covering the whole body, including the hair, and most of the face.” She continued that; “This interpretation is illogical. If the whole body and face were meant, there would be no reason to tell women to veil their bosoms specifically, while the later interpretation of ‘adornment’ to mean everything but the hands, feet, and (possibly) the face is a forced one.4
However, Al Qaradawi, a famous Egyptian scholar, quoted the same verse to conclude that the Hijab is compulsory and is an injunction based on a literal reading of the Koran. He asserted that the Hijab is, “not the result of an opinion by jurists or even by Muslims; it is a Koranic order.”5
As regards the verse in which Jalabib is mentioned, the researcher considered it to be misplaced evidence.
O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves [part] of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused. (Quran 33:59)
The supporters of Hijab as an Islamic duty overlooked the historical background and the cause of revelation, for the verse was meant to distinguish between the pure and promiscuous women and slaves. At that time, all women tended not to cover their faces. Hence, the verse was revealed so as to protect the pure from some men, who would gaze at them while they were excreting or urinating.
Mustapha Mohamed Rashed rejected the Hadith, reported by Abu Dawud, in which Asma, daughter of Abu Bakr, was ordered by the prophet to expose only her face and palms. He says it should not be taken into any sort of consideration because it is “Ahaad” or its narration does not fulfill one of the most important required conditions, connectivity.
It is not clear whether the dissertation was preserved on the shelves of Al Azhar University and could not be discussed. This possibility made the Moroccan newspaper, Almassaa, wonder if the Arab Spring was conducive in bringing this issue to the surface.
Truth.8 posted on 22-4-2014 01:49 PM
you still in denial:
are u saying those arabs who spoke and write which is their mother language is better than u? u not arab...
so, the arabs who is muslim says covering head is not according to quran..
meaning u are fraud and liar
Here I post another PhD who is arab ...do not agreed on hijab or the head covering....u not a phd and arab decendant ....so the issue on hijab and head covering is not God commandement..here is the link:
Morocco World News
Casablanca, June 24, 2012
Last month at Al Azhar University, Sheikh Mustapha Mohamed Rashed defended a thesis that sparked a heated debate among religious scholars. The candidate concluded that Hijab, or the veil, is not an Islamic duty.
The claim is not the first of its kind, but the mere fact that it is adopted in Al Azhar University – the Sunni Islam’s foremost seat of learning –makes it controversial.
Sheikh Mustapha Mohamed Rashed argued that Hijab is not an Islamic duty. He stated that Hijab refers to the cover of the head, which is not mentioned in the Holy Quran at all. “Nonetheless, a bunch of scholars insisted vehemently that the veil is both an Islamic duty and one of the most important pillars of Islam,” he added.
In doing so, the PhD candidate points out, “they deviated from the purposes of the Islamic law and “Sahih Atafsir” or the true interpretation. They rejected reasoning and relied only on literal text.”
According to Mohamed Rashed, these scholars de-contextualized the verses of the Quran and interpreted them in their very own liking, following some ancient scholars, as if what they said is sacred and is no subject to Ijtihad.
Ijtihad is a technical term, which literally means “exertion” in a jurisprudential sense; it is the exertion of mental energy by a Muslim jurist to deduce legal rulings from Islam’s sacred texts.1
The researcher continued that the scholars, who claim that Hijab is an important pillar of Islam, departed from “Al Minhaj Assahih,” or the true path, of interpretation and reasoning, which interprets the verses according to their historical context and the causes of revelation. These scholars “interpreted the verses in their general sense, overlooking the causes of their revelation, intentionally or due to their limited intellectual capacity resulted in psychological scourge.” Worse yet, they approached hundreds of important issues in the same way.”
“The supporters of Hijab as an Islamic duty base their arguments on inconsistent and wrong evidence. They would ascribe various meanings to the veil, from Hijab to Khimar to Jalabib, a fact which shows that they digressed from the true meaning they intended to address, the cover of the head,” he added. The researcher attempted to deconstruct the three claims that are derived from interpretations of the sacred texts.
Literally, Hijab means “a veil,” “curtain,” “partition” or “separation.” 2 The verse in which it is mentioned is specifically addressed to the wives of the prophet; there is no dispute among scholars about that at all. The verse states as follow,
And when you ask [his wives] for something, ask them from behind a partition ( hijab). That is purer for your hearts and their hearts. And it is not [conceivable or lawful] for you to harm the Messenger of Allah or to marry his wives after him, ever. Indeed, that would be in the sight of Allah an enormity. ( Quran 33: 53)
The term hijab then is meant to have a partition between the wives of the prophet and his companions. It is not addressed to the Muslim women, otherwise it would have been stated, says Mohamed Rashed.
Bouthaina Shaaban seems to have held the same belief.3She said that those who imitate the wives of the prophet and wear the Hijab are disobeying God’s will, for He said,
O wives of the Prophet, you are not like anyone among women. (Quran 33: 32)
As for the term Khimar, it is found in a verse of the Quran stating,
And tell the believing women to reduce [some] of their vision and guard their private parts and not expose their adornment except that which [necessarily] appears thereof and to wrap [a portion of] their headcovers over their chests. (Quran 24: 31)
The researcher pointed out that the evidence is invalid. The intent of the text is to refer to the cover of the breast whose exposure is un-Islamic, but not to what is perceived nowadays as Hijab for the head.
In this regard, it is believed that when the pre-Islamic Arabs went to battle, Arab women seeing the men off to war would bare their breasts to encourage them to fight; or they would do so at the battle itself, as in the case of the Meccan women led by Hind at the Battle of Uhud.2
Nikkie Keddie, a prominent historian and an expert on women’s issues in Islam, said that this verse does not refer to covering the hair. It was only “later interpreted as meaning covering the whole body, including the hair, and most of the face.” She continued that; “This interpretation is illogical. If the whole body and face were meant, there would be no reason to tell women to veil their bosoms specifically, while the later interpretation of ‘adornment’ to mean everything but the hands, feet, and (possibly) the face is a forced one.4
However, Al Qaradawi, a famous Egyptian scholar, quoted the same verse to conclude that the Hijab is compulsory and is an injunction based on a literal reading of the Koran. He asserted that the Hijab is, “not the result of an opinion by jurists or even by Muslims; it is a Koranic order.”5
As regards the verse in which Jalabib is mentioned, the researcher considered it to be misplaced evidence.
O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves [part] of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused. (Quran 33:59)
The supporters of Hijab as an Islamic duty overlooked the historical background and the cause of revelation, for the verse was meant to distinguish between the pure and promiscuous women and slaves. At that time, all women tended not to cover their faces. Hence, the verse was revealed so as to protect the pure from some men, who would gaze at them while they were excreting or urinating.
Mustapha Mohamed Rashed rejected the Hadith, reported by Abu Dawud, in which Asma, daughter of Abu Bakr, was ordered by the prophet to expose only her face and palms. He says it should not be taken into any sort of consideration because it is “Ahaad” or its narration does not fulfill one of the most important required conditions, connectivity.
It is not clear whether the dissertation was preserved on the shelves of Al Azhar University and could not be discussed. This possibility made the Moroccan newspaper, Almassaa, wonder if the Arab Spring was conducive in bringing this issue to the surface.
Do you know why I call you a retard? It is because you don't even understand what you read.
Sheikh Mustapha Mohamed Rashed was a PhD candidate defending his thesis , the so called head covering is not dutiful. He was just a Phd candidate , not a scholar yet. I have underlined and bolded the pertinant points for you. Read again and try to understand what you read. I should charge you for teaching you how to understand what you read.
In the same vein , Dr Yusuf Qardawi , a real scholar stated that the headcover in the said verse means headcovering is dutiful. In the end the thesis was shelved. Could be he failed in his Phd .... poor chap - Mustapha Mohamed Rashed , cannot call him a sheikh yet.
Don't you understand what you read? Do you think you need to brush up your english understanding before making yourself a retard? You've got really bad understanding but a very thick skin. Tak tau malu ke? Apa daaa ....
Interestingly , if you go to the link and read one of the comments (at the bottom of page) :
Sheikh Mustapha Mohamed Rashed and Al Azhar University say this story is false! Did Jamal Saidi verify this story with the Sheik or the university… or did he see some chatter on Facebook and wrote it as the truth?
It is therefore no surprise that it has now emerged that the entire report on the Al-Azhar hijab thesis was completely fabricated. According to an official statement from the University of Al-Azhar by Al-Shaikh Usama Al-Sayyid, “No one by the name of Mustapha Rashed was granted a doctorate, nor did any student submit a thesis on this subject and it is literally impossible for the University of Al-Azhar to grant a PhD for such a strange thesis that is entirely against the teachings and principles of Islam.” He also stated that the officials of the college of Shari’ah are surprised that such a report could spread so far and wide merely on the basis of a Facebook post. He also noted the timing of the report, which was released during the elections when there were ongoing debates about the implementation of Islamic law in government.
Nak mula bohong ye?
In the end , you are just a liar lah tambi. Issit just that you are desperate that you did not check out the information you have. You are looking really bad here.
Per your post #112
(1) How do you come to the understanding that us muslims understand hijab = head cover? Nobody stated so
(2) Look at your post #101 , is there a bracket between the word 'head cover'? Yes or no?
(3) Where is the reference of the article that confirm 'khimar' is not head cover? There is no authoritative reference
Can you provide the authoritative source(s) that the word 'khimar' in Quran24:31
does not mean headcover?
Why so scared to answer? Last edited by sam1528 on 22-4-2014 05:43 PM
sam1528 posted on 22-4-2014 05:22 PM
Do you know why I call you a retard? It is because you don't even understand what you read.
She ...
In the same vein , Dr Yusuf Qardawi , a real scholar stated that the headcover in the said verse means headcovering is dutiful. In the end the thesis was shelved. Could be he failed in his Phd .... poor chap - Mustapha Mohamed Rashed , cannot call him a sheikh yet.
Don't you understand what you read? Do you think you need to brush up your english understanding before making yourself a retard? You've got really bad understanding but a very thick skin. Tak tau malu ke? Apa daaa ....
the fact remain that a muslims scholar mustapha object such head covering..now how could you make a statement he failed phd ? he might be right in his view because he arab...u are wrong...
now u saying i cant read....what kind of excuses is that? running away from my question...a total failure I guess
Truth.8 posted on 22-4-2014 06:10 PM
the fact remain that a muslims scholar mustapha object such head covering..now how could you make a statement he failed phd ? he might be right in his view because he arab...u are wrong...
now u saying i cant read....what kind of excuses is that? running away from my question...a total failure I guess
Gee whizz , you are a confirmed to having less than average intelligence.
Didn't you read my response #147? Do you know how to read? If you had read it
- Mustapha Mohamed Rashed was just a Phd candidate defending his thesis , he is not a scholar yet , if his thesis has been shelved it means he failed and his thesis been put to cold storage
- the news is a false news
You now fail on 2 counts
(1) You don't even know what is a Phd candidate
(2) You are spreading false news meaning you are resorting to lying
You are desperate , aren't you?
Per your post #112
(1) How do you come to the understanding that us muslims understand hijab = head cover? Nobody stated so
(2) Look at your post #101 , is there a bracket between the word 'head cover'? Yes or no?
(3) Where is the reference of the article that confirm 'khimar' is not head cover? There is no authoritative reference
Can you provide the authoritative source(s) that the word 'khimar' in Quran24:31
Truth.8 posted on 22-4-2014 07:52 PM
the fact remain ...many muslims view head covering is not as what quran...one example is sister in islam..
Ha ha , podah lah tambi. Now , to you 'sisters in Islam' are scholars? You are so desperate apart from have been caught trying to lie and not having the required level to understand what you read.
Anybody can speculate head covering is not in the Quran , like you but its the evidence that matters. Where is your evidence? Are you going to try to lie again by referring to Mustapha Mohamed Rashed?
Per your post #112
(1) How do you come to the understanding that us muslims understand hijab = head cover? Nobody stated so
(2) Look at your post #101 , is there a bracket between the word 'head cover'? Yes or no?
(3) Where is the reference of the article that confirm 'khimar' is not head cover? There is no authoritative reference
Can you provide the authoritative source(s) that the word 'khimar' in Quran24:31
sam1528 posted on 22-4-2014 09:25 PM
Ha ha , podah lah tambi. Now , to you 'sisters in Islam' are scholars? You are so desperate apart ...
Ha ha , podah lah tambi. Now , to you 'sisters in Islam' are scholars? You are so desperate apart from have been caught trying to lie and not having the required level to understand what you read.
ayioo ...ini mcm pun tak jawab ka? sister islam tak pakai tudung...adakah mereka infidel?? mereka tak setuju dlm isu tudung2 sebab dlm quran tak sebut hanya chest aja...
Truth.8 posted on 22-4-2014 10:16 PM
ayioo ...ini mcm pun tak jawab ka? sister islam tak pakai tudung...adakah mereka infidel?? mereka tak setuju dlm isu tudung2 sebab dlm quran tak sebut hanya chest aja...
After being caught trying to lie , now you are being dishonest. You are not looking good tambi.
Apa yang tak jawab? Not like you , so scared to answer questions and to provide evidence. When did 'sisters in Islam' became scholars? They disagree it is their issue (same like you). What and where is the evidence?
Until now there is no evidence from you except
- useless articles of personal opinions from Quaranites
- a lie about an Al Azhar PhD candidate whose thesis suppopsedly about no headcovering in Quran
- copy paste of personal opinions from forums
Ha ha , Quran tak sebut? Kamu tak tau pasal kamu buta huruf Bahasa Arab. Bahasa Inggeris kamu pun dah kantoi tak usah cerita lah tentang Bahasa Arab.
Per your post #112
(1) How do you come to the understanding that us muslims understand hijab = head cover? Nobody stated so
(2) Look at your post #101 , is there a bracket between the word 'head cover'? Yes or no?
(3) Where is the reference of the article that confirm 'khimar' is not head cover? There is no authoritative reference
Can you provide the authoritative source(s) that the word 'khimar' in Quran24:31
Truth.8 posted on 23-4-2014 01:11 PM
you caught me? infact is you are lying...i could says maybe 70% do not agreed the hijab or head covering.....
are they unbelievers????
I say again , you are a liar and a dishonest person. Why?
(1) Your copy paste about Mustapha Mohamed Rashed has been proven false by a Non Profit Organization that analyse the creditworthy of news
(2) You simply pull figures from your ass - ha ha 70% disagreement to hijab - did you fart this % out?
Where is your evidence? People can say anything they want. Its the evidence that matters
You don't have anything that is why you have started to lie and be dishonest.
Per your post #112
(1) How do you come to the understanding that us muslims understand hijab = head cover? Nobody stated so
(2) Look at your post #101 , is there a bracket between the word 'head cover'? Yes or no?
(3) Where is the reference of the article that confirm 'khimar' is not head cover? There is no authoritative reference
Can you provide the authoritative source(s) that the word 'khimar' in Quran24:31
zamkumis posted on 23-4-2014 03:54 PM
Kalau terus tak pakai apa-apa truth macamana? kau suka tengok ke?
kan saya tulis pakai yg bersopan dan pakaian tidak begitu ketat ....dan kain yg tutup bahagain dada...isu tutup rambut tidak perlu lah...sebab itu 70% muslims berkata quran tidak menyebut isu tutup rambut di kepala...
Truth.8 posted on 23-4-2014 03:38 PM
why all the bla bla bla bla...
my question still stand:
you caught me? infact is you are lying...i could says maybe 70% do not agreed the hijab or head covering.....
are they unbelievers????
Ha ha , what question have you got apart from getting caught lying and being dishonest? You mean 70% not agreeing to hijab is your question? Aiyoyo tambi , better for you to go back to school. The 70% figure is a % that you pull out from your ass as there is no supporting stats. Why do you keep on making a fool of yourself?
So far you have been very scared to answer any questions.
Where do you get the idea that not agreeing to hijab makes the person non believers? Another one of your 'facts' being pulled from your ass? There is no intelligence at all from you.
Per your post #112
(1) How do you come to the understanding that us muslims understand hijab = head cover? Nobody stated so
(2) Look at your post #101 , is there a bracket between the word 'head cover'? Yes or no?
(3) Where is the reference of the article that confirm 'khimar' is not head cover? There is no authoritative reference
Can you provide the authoritative source(s) that the word 'khimar' in Quran24:31
sam1528 posted on 23-4-2014 05:47 PM
Ha ha , what question have you got apart from getting caught lying and being dishonest? You mean 7 ...
so, many do not agreed on the issue covering head...even malay
"Isu pakai tudung adalah perkara remeh temeh dan tak dak relevan ngan islam. Bertudung kepala ada la amalan budaya orang di Timor Tengah dan Eropah sebelum islam wujud. Malah penganut kristian & yahudi jugak memakai tudung oleh perempuan mereka. Dalam Alquran pun tak dak ayat menyuruh tutup kepala apa yang di ajaq supaya menutup aurat jerr. Memakai tudung ada la pendapat ulama salaf dan bukan nya hukum Allah...!!!" - anon. http://hawauyu.blogspot.com/2011 ... -perkara-remeh.html
....and some muslims are so stupid and quote :
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 with his head covered, disgraces his head. But every woman praying or prophesying with her head uncovered disgraces her head, for it is the same as if she were shaven. For if a woman is not covered, let her be shaven. But if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, let her cover her head. A man indeed ought not to cover his head, because he is the image and glory of God. But woman is the glory of man. For man was not created for woman, but woman for man. This is why the woman ought to have a sign of authority over her head, because of the angels
the above verses saying if she is shave or bald...so let her cover...even some hindu women who shave their head for thaipusam....later they cover their head...
Post time 21-4-2014 05:41 PM
Author
![[Disney+ 2024] BLOOD FREE/DOMINANT SPECIES - Ju Ji Hoon, Han Hyo Joo, Lee Hee Joon, Lee Mu Saeng](https://uf.cari.com.my/forumx/mforum/block/19/19d21a65bfffd47b8261100ca1c0fb1b.jpg)
