Uncut Hair

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Truthseeker

So only uncut hair is actively having growing long hair? Wouldn't that mean a man with trimmed hair to his buttocks would not have long hair?

*Ahhh yes, this old familiar equivocation fallacy. What is said for the woman cannot be said for the man since - as this very text plainly states - women are to have long-uncut hair & men are not to have long hair.

*First, you need to actually interact w. the grammatical information if you disagree w. these grammarians. From there, if you have some exegetical data to overthrow all of the linguists I have referenced in this thread - please offer that internal-textual evidence. The verb referenced is active voice. Do you know what that denotes for the subject?

*Until then, I will not chase the usual AFF rabbit trails designed to move away from the inspired biblical language & text. Short or cut hair on a Christian woman is disgraceful - period .

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Bingo.

*Equivocation fallacy .

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by rdp

*Equivocation fallacy .

What is said for the woman cannot be said for the man since - as this very text plainly states

Actually, since Paul does compare man and woman, the language "can't" mean what you're saying it means unless you change the definition of "long" half way through. If "long" means "long-uncut" for a woman, you can't change the meaning when applying it to a man. So, according to the way you're using the language, it is a shame for a man to have "long-uncut" hair, like a woman. And so, if a woman's hair is as though it is "shorn or shaven" if she so much as trims dead ends, her hair obviously ceases to be "long-uncut". That being the linguistic standard you're setting, then a man's hair is no longer "long-uncut" if he so much as trims his dead ends. My point is that this can't be the meaning, else a man could wear his hair down to his ankles, and as long as it is trimmed, this text would define it as the same as being shorn or shaven.

There are millions of people on the planet who read and speak Greek. I don't know any of them who wouldn't find your take on the Greek rather entertaining, and soundly correct you on it. You have over 1,800 years of cultural application of the text that spans four continents. You have commentary from some of the greatest scholars who have ever lived. And you're expecting me to believe that some small clique of preachers, who couldn't order a hotdog in a Greek restaurant, have figured out some ancient secret, hidden, mystical, meaning in the Greek of I Corinthians 11... using nothing but their Strong's concordances??? LOL

I'm sure that there are universities near you. Do what I did. Call and see if you can find a professor who teaches Greek and/or Greek Literature. Then contact them. See if they can spare a few moments over coffee to cover this chapter with you. They'll soundly explain it all to you as they read the Greek text without missing a beat right before your very eyes. If you're like me, call a second professor and do the same. You'll find yourself being told the same thing.

This isn't rocket science. This isn't a mystery. This isn't a puzzle. This isn't a Rubik's Cube. Just read it, and allow it to mean what it says. Because it says what it means, and it means what it says.

Formal Equivalency:

1 Corinthians 11:1-16 English Standard Version (ESV)
1 Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ.
2 Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you. 3 But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God. 4 Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head, 5 but every wife who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, since it is the same as if her head were shaven. 6 For if a wife will not cover her head, then she should cut her hair short. But since it is disgraceful for a wife to cut off her hair or shave her head, let her cover her head. 7 For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. 8 For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. 9 Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. 10 That is why a wife ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. 11 Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man nor man of woman; 12 for as woman was made from man, so man is now born of woman. And all things are from God. 13 Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a wife to pray to God with her head uncovered? 14 Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears long hair it is a disgrace for him, 15 but if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her for a covering. 16 If anyone is inclined to be contentious, we have no such practice, nor do the churches of God.

Dynamic Equivalency:

1 Corinthians 11:1-16 New Living Translation (NLT)
1 And you should imitate me, just as I imitate Christ.
2 I am so glad that you always keep me in your thoughts, and that you are following the teachings I passed on to you. 3 But there is one thing I want you to know: The head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. 4 A man dishonors his head if he covers his head while praying or prophesying. 5 But a woman dishonors her head if she prays or prophesies without a covering on her head, for this is the same as shaving her head. 6 Yes, if she refuses to wear a head covering, she should cut off all her hair! But since it is shameful for a woman to have her hair cut or her head shaved, she should wear a covering.
7 A man should not wear anything on his head when worshiping, for man is made in God’s image and reflects God’s glory. And woman reflects man’s glory. 8 For the first man didn’t come from woman, but the first woman came from man. 9 And man was not made for woman, but woman was made for man. 10 For this reason, and because the angels are watching, a woman should wear a covering on her head to show she is under authority.
11 But among the Lord’s people, women are not independent of men, and men are not independent of women. 12 For although the first woman came from man, every other man was born from a woman, and everything comes from God.
13 Judge for yourselves. Is it right for a woman to pray to God in public without covering her head? 14 Isn’t it obvious that it’s disgraceful for a man to have long hair? 15 And isn’t long hair a woman’s pride and joy? For it has been given to her as a covering. 16 But if anyone wants to argue about this, I simply say that we have no other custom than this, and neither do God’s other churches.

[JoeBandy]

My opinion on this subject.... This whole hair thing hinges on verse 16. A salvational doctrine has been made over a CUSTOM that is made reference to 2000 years ago. There is absolutely no way to know what the exact context was when Paul wrote this. Plus verse 16 plainly states it is a CUSTOM. Lets look at verse 3... the one crowd skips over this verse and makes the middle of this chapter heaven and hell! Let here a oneness explanation of the head of Christ is God. Not only that but read verse 3 very slowly.. then its plain to see the "head" in this context is not that thing that sits on top of your neck.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by JoeBandy

My opinion on this subject.... This whole hair thing hinges on verse 16. A salvational doctrine has been made over a CUSTOM that is made reference to 2000 years ago. There is absolutely no way to know what the exact context was when Paul wrote this. Plus verse 16 plainly states it is a CUSTOM. Lets look at verse 3... the one crowd skips over this verse and makes the middle of this chapter heaven and hell! Let here a oneness explanation of the head of Christ is God. Not only that but read verse 3 very slowly.. then its plain to see the "head" in this context is not that thing that sits on top of your neck.

Good points.

[Truthseeker]

Was it sin for women to cut their hair in the old testament? If so, where? Sin is transgression of the law. Where in the law is it commanded?

[JoeBandy]

Originally Posted by Truthseeker

Was it sin for women to cut their hair in the old testament? If so, where? Sin is transgression of the law. Where in the law is it commanded?

It is my understanding in that society it was a custom for a woman to be shaved or shorn if she was caught in a sin. Now.. that being said that sin would be "covered" if she married the man she was found in sin with.

[Truthseeker]

Originally Posted by rdp

*Ahhh yes, this old familiar equivocation fallacy. What is said for the woman cannot be said for the man since - as this very text plainly states - women are to have long-uncut hair & men are not to have long hair.

*First, you need to actually interact w. the grammatical information if you disagree w. these grammarians. From there, if you have some exegetical data to overthrow all of the linguists I have referenced in this thread - please offer that internal-textual evidence. The verb referenced is active voice. Do you know what that denotes for the subject?

*Until then, I will not chase the usual AFF rabbit trails designed to move away from the inspired biblical language & text. Short or cut hair on a Christian woman is disgraceful - period .

Isn't the same word for long used for both?

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Aquila

There are millions of people on the planet who read and speak Greek. I don't know any of them who wouldn't find your take on the Greek rather entertaining, and soundly correct you on it. You have over 1,800 years of cultural application of the text that spans four continents. You have commentary from some of the greatest scholars who have ever lived. And you're expecting me to believe that some small clique of preachers, who couldn't order a hotdog in a Greek restaurant, have figured out some ancient secret, hidden, mystical, meaning in the Greek of I Corinthians 11... using nothing but their Strong's concordances??? LOL

I'm sure that there are universities near you. Do what I did. Call and see if you can find a professor who teaches Greek and/or Greek Literature. Then contact them. See if they can spare a few moments over coffee to cover this chapter with you. They'll soundly explain it all to you as they read the Greek text without missing a beat right before your very eyes. If you're like me, call a second professor and do the same. You'll find yourself being told the same thing.

This isn't rocket science. This isn't a mystery. This isn't a puzzle. This isn't a Rubik's Cube. Just read it, and allow it to mean what it says. Because it says what it means, and it means what it says.

*First, after taking Greek-proper & studying it for many years now I can speed-read, write & translate the Greek text just fine on my own (not at all "boasting," just stating the facts). A couple of years ago I turned down an invitation from Dr. Gary Hill (student of renowned grammarian Dr. Gleason Archer) to teach Greek I in overseas Bible colleges. You simply don't know what you're talking about & are barking up the wrong tree. How many years of Greek-proper have you had again?

*Second, if you would have taken the time to actually read the link I have posted you would see Greek professor after Greek professor that has already been consulted on this topic. Psst, guess what? It is *YOU* they would "find your take on the Greek rather entertaining, and soundly correct you on it." I will gladly meet them on their own territory using nothing but the Greek text standing alone (I read from it daily). Simply, you should take your own advice & allow the original biblical data to read for itself! Mind-boggling.

*Third, again, if you have some exegetical-grammatical information to overthrow the vast resources I've already referenced (multiple times) in this thread - then please post it. I have already offered a direct translation & diagram of the pertinent verse at hand. Merely quoting the ESV & NLT (umm, did you happen to catch the NLT footnote on this verse that I posted earler?) does not qualify as discourse analysis or phrasing.

*This thread is an excellent example of why I don't waste a lot of time on here (although I have spent more time on here recently than I have in years). The usual apologetic methodology is to argue by denial & mere assertion - not actual exegesis.

*Same ol' AFF I see. Currently in the process of moving. Will check in as time allots. God bless.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by rdp

*First, after taking Greek-proper & studying it for many years now I can speed-read, write & translate the Greek text just fine on my own (not at all "boasting," just stating the facts). A couple of years ago I turned down an invitation from Dr. Gary Hill (student of renowned grammarian Dr. Gleason Archer) to teach Greek I in overseas Bible colleges. You simply don't know what you're talking about & are barking up the wrong tree. How many years of Greek-proper have you had again?

*Second, if you would have taken the time to actually read the link I have posted you would see Greek professor after Greek professor that has already been consulted on this topic. Psst, guess what? It is *YOU* they would "find your take on the Greek rather entertaining, and soundly correct you on it." I will gladly meet them on their own territory using nothing but the Greek text standing alone (I read from it daily). Simply, you should take your own advice & allow the original biblical data to read for itself! Mind-boggling.

*Third, again, if you have some exegetical-grammatical information to overthrow the vast resources I've already referenced (multiple times) in this thread - then please post it. I have already offered a direct translation & diagram of the pertinent verse at hand. Merely quoting the ESV & NLT (umm, did you happen to catch the NLT footnote on this verse that I posted earler?) does not qualify as discourse analysis or phrasing.

*This thread is an excellent example of why I don't waste a lot of time on here (although I have spent more time on here recently than I have in years). The usual apologetic methodology is to argue by denial & mere assertion - not actual exegesis.

*Same ol' AFF I see. Currently in the process of moving. Will check in as time allots. God bless.

Maybe we can find a source we agree upon and ask them. I'm sure there are Greek communities online that can help translate. Are you up for something like that?