Bible study about "spiritual covering" . . .

[Michael37]

1 hour ago, com7fy8 said:

You are saying these are four ways a wrong covering arrangement operates.

I think of >

"They zealously court you, but for no good; yes, they want to exclude you, that you may be zealous for them." (Galatians 4:17)

I consider that "exclude", here, can mean isolating you with a person or group so they can control and use you.

And one thing that can give this away is how people seduce your attention away from God, and to them. They do not make sure they challenge you to become able to submit to God in His peace so He is guiding you reliably according to all He knows . . . about them and all else.

"And let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to which also you were called in one body; and be thankful." (Colossians 3:15)

Thanks for the references, which are appropriate and edifying..

[Alive]

I am repeating myself and what others have also pointed out.

The Holy Spirit makes Christ front and center.

[Starise]

The 'covering' here in my area which is heavily Amish and Mennonite is something external worn by those women.

In order to be accepted in their group women have to wear one. In reality I would venture to guess most of them do it because it's a requirement and might not understand the real implications either way. 

I believe the physical covering for a woman is her hair itself, so conversely shaving her head would look like rebellion.

 Paul says these famous words in Corinthians 11-

9Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. 10For this reason a woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head, because of the angels. 11In the Lord, however, woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman.…

This is probably the main text used to justify women covering their heads by these various groups, which IMO is an overreach of the text. " because of the angels" has been a hotly debated text. 

 

[com7fy8]

On 11/12/2022 at 2:05 PM, Alive said:

Yup--this is very important as I have seen and fellowshipped with a group that took the whole 'spiritual covering' thing and warped it, as men often do--to become an authoritarian movement under which must leverage is applied to the poor saints taken in by the manipulation of talented individuals lifting themselves above the saints. I believe at the core of these types of errors is the spirit of the Nicolaitans.

How do you understand that the Nicolaitan thing can cause cultic "spiritual covering" movements? I would appreciate reading what you have on this. Here's what I have been able to get >

I just did some reading on the Nicolaitans, and it seems there are people who believe the Nicolaitans were into pleasure, and seeking pleasure could include eating food offered to idols and practicing immorality in the temples. By joining in with an organized way of seeking pleasure, like this, they could have support and encouragement to do that. They thus could have humans as they're covering, an excuse with social support for doing what is wrong. Ones could claim to have authority over them and use their gods to back up what they told them to do, so nobody would be asking questions. 

And I think one sort of covering movement did something like that > I don't mean they had people telling others to go after all sorts of pleasure, but they had people telling others what to do, without question. They would assign one person over someone else to tell that person which choices to make in one's life - - without any questioning, even when the controlled person could see that the bossing person was wrong . . . according to what I read. And it wrecked people's lives, and the ones who organized that false accountability thing saw how bad it was getting and got out!

But ones can feel they aren't liable if they are doing what someone else in authority tells them to do. And being told to get whatever pleasure they please is certainly something ones might not want to question! And so they might welcome a set-up with authority figures and gods who are telling them to get all the pleasure they want, and those people and gods over them are their "covering" not to be even questioned! Yeah, this can happen, right now > how there even are organized hierarchies of religious authorities telling people their wrong ways of pleasure seeking are ok; and there are people who in some ways have used legal power to threaten and punish ones who refuse to accept the pleasure seeking that is wrong.

So - - - is something like this what you have learned about the Nicolaitans being at the core of cultic covering things? 

I see how this could relate to the issue of our discussion here. There are movements in which the leaders are supposed to be above question. This might be like how the Nicolaitans could have tried to use gods and authority figures to make themselves seem to be above question when they told people to seek pleasure, instead of seeking God. They used gods to enforce their false authority and to be a covering for ones excusing themselves to disobey God. And nowadays we can see how there is enforcement and legal threats against ones who question certain sorts of sexually wrong ways to get pleasure. And there is social support for ones doing wrong things > they have a covering, of sorts. 

@Liese And, maybe like this, there are ones who want to be above question in their homes. But God's word says > 

"Test all things; hold fast what is good." (1 Thessalonians 5:21)

It can be good to have someone in authority for overseeing a church or a home. But possibly God does mean for all of us to be able to evaluate however that person in authority is doing things and leading. We need to be able to make sure with God, about "all things", so all through the day we go the right way, even while our covering people might not be available to tell us what to do.

I have been with pastors who would give us the word, but they would encourage us to check what they say by God's word and do not go along with them if what they say is not what God's word says. So they used their authority to tell us to make sure with God about what they told us! 

Edited November 16, 2022 by com7fy8

[Michael37]

21 minutes ago, com7fy8 said:

How do you understand that the Nicolaitan thing can cause cultic "spiritual covering" movements? I would appreciate reading what you have on this. Here's what I have been able to get >

I just did some reading on the Nicolaitans, and it seems there are people who believe the Nicolaitans were into pleasure, and seeking pleasure could include eating food offered to idols and practicing immorality in the temples. By joining in with an organized way of seeking pleasure, like this, they could have support and encouragement to do that. They thus could have humans as their covering, an excuse with social support. And ones over them could tell them what to do, without anyone asking questions. 

And I think one sort of covering movement did something like that > I don't mean they had people telling others to go after all sorts of pleasure, but they had people telling others what to do, without question. They assigned a person over someone else to tell that person which choices to make in one's life, without any questioning, even when the submitting person could see the bossing person was wrong . . . according to what I read. And it wrecked people's lives, and the ones who organized that false accountability thing saw how bad it was getting and got out!

But ones can feel they aren't liable if they are doing what someone else in authority tells them to do. And being told to get whatever pleasure they please is certainly something ones might want to not question! And so they might welcome a set-up with authority figures and gods who are telling them to get all the pleasure they want, and those people and gods over them are their "covering" not to be even questioned! Yeah, this can happen, right now > how there even are religious people in churches telling people their wrong ways of pleasure seeking are ok.

So - - - is something like this what you have learned about the Nicolaitans being at the core of cultic covering things? 

I see how this could relate to the issue of our discussion here. There are movements in which the leaders are supposed to be above question. The Nicolaitans might try to make themselves above question when the told people to seek pleasure, instead of seeking God. They used gods to enforce their false authority and to be a covering for ones excusing themselves to disobey God. And nowadays we can see how there is enforcement and legal threats against ones who question certain sorts of sexually wrong ways to get pleasure. And there is social support for ones doing wrong things > they have a covering, of sorts. 

And maybe like this, there are ones who want to be above question in their homes. But God's word says > 

"Test all things; hold fast what is good." (1 Thessalonians 5:21)

It can be good to have someone in authority for overseeing a church or a home. But possibly God does mean for all of us to be able to evaluate however that person in authority is doing things and leading. We need to be able to make sure with God, about "all things", so all through the day we go the right way, even while our covering people might not be available to tell us what to do.

I have been with pastors who would give us the word, but they would say check what they say by God's word and do not go along with them if what they say is not what God's word says. So they used their authority to tell us to make sure with God about what they told us! 

Hi @com7fy8

Here's a quote from Watchman Nee that may interest you:

"Nicolait in Greek is composed of two words. Nikao means "conquer" or "above others." Laos means "common people," "secular people," or "laity." So nicolait means "conquering the common people," "climbing above the laity." Nicolaitans, then, refers to a group of people who esteem themselves higher than the common believers. The Lord is above; the common believers are below. The Nicolaitans are below the Lord yet above the common believers. The Lord hates the behavior of the Nicolaitans. The conduct of climbing over and above the common believers as a mediatorial class is what the Lord detests; it is something to be hated. But at that time there was only the behavior; it had not yet become a teaching."^[10]

Blessings from Michael37.

[Alive]

7 hours ago, Michael37 said:

Hi @com7fy8

Here's a quote from Watchman Nee that may interest you:

"Nicolait in Greek is composed of two words. Nikao means "conquer" or "above others." Laos means "common people," "secular people," or "laity." So nicolait means "conquering the common people," "climbing above the laity." Nicolaitans, then, refers to a group of people who esteem themselves higher than the common believers. The Lord is above; the common believers are below. The Nicolaitans are below the Lord yet above the common believers. The Lord hates the behavior of the Nicolaitans. The conduct of climbing over and above the common believers as a mediatorial class is what the Lord detests; it is something to be hated. But at that time there was only the behavior; it had not yet become a teaching."^[10]

Blessings from Michael37.

Michael and Nee got it right. I have said all I am gonna say on the subject.

[missmuffet]

Does a person / ministry need a spiritual covering?

https://www.gotquestions.org

ANSWER

The term spiritual covering is usually used in the context of the Shepherding Movement, though it can have other meanings. In its primary context, having a spiritual covering means being submitted to the authority of another Christian believer. The concept is taken to mean that, for a person’s spiritual life and/or ministry to be valid in the eyes of God, the person or ministry must be under direct submission to a specific person. This might be an elder or pastor of a church, an older or more mature Christian, or some other authority figure. The idea that a “spiritual covering” is required was initially developed within the Charismatic movement. Today, it is sometimes associated with the New Apostolic Reformation and the Hebrew Roots movement.

According to the teaching of spiritual covering, Christians are not only accountable to God but also to their leaders and elders. For biblical backing, supporters of spiritual covering cite verses such as Ephesians 5:2, 1 Thessalonians 5:12–13, 1 Corinthians 11:2–16, and 1 Peter 5:5. In practice, the concept of spiritual covering makes an earthly authority figure an intercessor or a substitute for God in the life of the person or ministry that has the “covering.” This has led some Christians to consult their designated “shepherd” prior to making career or family decisions. In some cases, professing Christians have claimed that, given an apparent choice between obeying God or their shepherd, they would obey their earthly shepherd.

Naturally, this idea is not without controversy within Christianity. The teaching of spiritual covering has been the cause of various levels of authoritarian abuse. Several early proponents of the spiritual covering concept, such as Bob Mumford and Charles Simpson, have since distanced themselves from it and apologized for being involved. Of course, it is not wrong to submit to the authority of a pastor and follow his lead; however, with the “spiritual covering” concept, some groups have taken the basic structure of church authority and moved it far beyond biblical precepts.

Biblically, each person is ultimately accountable only to God (Romans 3:19; Matthew 12:36), not to any other person. Consulting with others for guidance (Proverbs 11:14) and being humble enough to learn from the wisdom of others (Proverbs 5:11–14) are commendable. Our approval comes from God, not men (2 Timothy 2:15). No person, strictly speaking, has the absolute right to declare our service to God valid or invalid (Romans 14:4). Mandating a human shepherd for our spiritual lives not only obscures our relationship to Christ (1 Timothy 2:5), but it can lead to division within the church (1 Corinthians 3:4–9). Jesus, in fact, speaks against excessive earthly authority in Matthew 20:25–28.

Submission to the will of God is necessary for all people and for any activity that claims to be a “ministry.” Respect for authority (Romans 13:1), mutual submission (Ephesians 5:21), and cooperation between believers (John 13:34) are commanded in the Bible. And relying on the experience and wisdom of others is a matter of common sense. However, there is no biblically valid mandate for a “spiritual covering” under a particular person in order for our efforts to be legitimate.
 

 

Edited November 16, 2022 by missmuffet

[Mr. M]

23 hours ago, missmuffet said:

However, there is no biblically valid mandate for a “spiritual covering” under a particular person in order for our efforts to be legitimate.

Isaiah 30:1 Woe to the rebellious children, saith the Lord, that take counsel, but not of me; and that cover with a covering, but not of my spirit, that they may add sin to sin:

The Spirit of the Lord is our covering. The question is one of access to that covering. To minimize the importance of this in any way is a mostly semantic exercise.

Psalm 91:1 He that dwells in the secret place of the most High shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty.

You can say, "I don't know James, I don't see the word 'covering' in this verse", but let's not be misled. The covering of the spirit is throughout scripture, from the cloud abiding over the wilderness camp, to the anointing oil poured over the High Priest (Psalm 133), to the symbolism of the mantle worn by the prophets. 

After gaining access by faith, we are taught that we must abide. Abiding under that Anointing that defines our purpose individually, as well as binds us together in fellowship. To abide under the Anointing requires submitting to the requirements that the Lord has laid out. True, no man can claim to be a spiritual covering, but to think that parents do not provide a covering for their children, or that mature christians do not provide the same for others is to harmfully diminish the power of prayer and intercession.

To attempt to be a "lone ranger" christian who doesn't need the prayer support of their fellow believers is to misunderstand the nature of a spiritual covering, and to ignore how often Paul solicited prayer from the churches. Regardless of how this idea has been abused over the years, this is without question an extremely important idea that cannot be easily dismissed with a "got questions" article. If that is not true, then why has the enemy made such an effort to misrepresent this to the church? Nor can we ignore the value of our fellowship, in discussing this matter in the forum, to dissolve all doubts!

There is without question a Biblical mandate to submit to authorities at all levels, not because they provide the covering, but in order to maintain access to that spiritual covering, to abide.