Uncut Hair and the Nazirite Vow for Women

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Esaias

"Without specific reference to length, a matter that is treated in the clause that precedes."

Are they saying that length IS treated in the clause preceding v15? What is "the matter that is treated in the clause that precedes"? And what exactly is the clause that precedes?

*Right, saw this also. The verse preceding it is Paul's appeal to "nature" relevant to hair length...which is precisely the point I've made all along in this thread. Just another supporting quotation IMO.

Does not nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace for him,

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Costeon

Great. May they always agree with you on everything!

*If not, I'll send them over to you after you're finished straightening out BDAG, Bauer, L&N, UBS, NIDNTTE, LXX Dict. , etc. !

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Costeon

I just added the part about braiding because I knew that would get you going and make you think you had a "gotcha" moment. This is too large of a topic to deal with you on. Let's just say, "Rdp, you are right. Thank God we have at least one person who is holding the line."

Well I'm being sarcastic again. I'm sorry.

*Yea, I made you do it all again (I knew you were toying w. me BTW) !

*Need me to send you some 1-800-numbers for your disorder?

#thereishelp !

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by 1ofthechosen

Ok i'm saying in verse 6 I see the covering in the first part "for if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn." I see this as something besides her hair, it just doesn't make sense otherwise. It's the same as saying shorn is to be shaven in the context of just a buzz cut. That's obvious. I don't believe the Apostle is just saying this about her hair being just the covering. So what i'm saying in verse 15 "But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering." The reason why i'm saying "in addition to" here is because I believe he made a covering a necessity in verse 5 and then 6. So he's talking about nature, but he's also saying "it is a glory to have long hair" by nature, and God has given you that in addition to the covering that is the necessity to cover your head in prayer and prophecy. Not either, or, but both.

Hmm. I will consider this.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by rdp

*Right, saw this also. The verse preceding it is Paul's appeal to "nature" relevant to hair length...which is precisely the point I've made all along in this thread. Just another supporting quotation IMO.

Does not nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace for him,

Was the cited entry for kome? Or komao? Because it seems (if the citation is for kome), they are saying the clause "for her kome is given her" etc is without any specific reference to length, and that length is dealt with in the preceding clause "but if a woman komao, it is a glory" etc.

So that kome may or may not have regard to length depending in context, and in 1 Cor 15 kome does not (itself) denote any length or have any idea of "long", and that rather the previous term komao (in the same verse, and by implication also in v 14) contains a reference or implication of length (ie "long")?

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Was the cited entry for kome? Or komao? Because it seems (if the citation is for kome), they are saying the clause "for her kome is given her" etc is without any specific reference to length, and that length is dealt with in the preceding clause "but if a woman komao, it is a glory" etc.

So that kome may or may not have regard to length depending in context, and in 1 Cor 15 kome does not (itself) denote any length or have any idea of "long", and that rather the previous term komao (in the same verse, and by implication also in v 14) contains a reference or implication of length (ie "long")?

*BDAG's entry is from κόμη just below κομᾷ. Just noticed their comment about the "context" of their references, which was my purpose for quoting this.

*Here's the NA28 text of I Cor. 11.15:

γυνὴ δὲ ἐὰν κομᾷ δόξα αὐτῇ ἐστιν; ὅτι ἡ κόμη ἀντὶ περιβολαίου ⸂δέδοται [αὐτῇ]⸃.

but if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her for a covering.

*The passage that precedes this dependent clause is:

Does not nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace for him.

[1ofthechosen]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Hmm. I will consider this.

erse (Click for Chapter)
New International Version
but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering.

New Living Translation
And isn't long hair a woman's pride and joy? For it has been given to her as a covering.

English Standard Version
but if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her for a covering.

Berean Study Bible
but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering.

Berean Literal Bible
but if a woman has long hair, it is to her glory? For the long hair instead of a covering is given to her.

New American Standard Bible
but if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her? For her hair is given to her for a covering.

King James Bible
But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.

Christian Standard Bible
but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her as a covering.

Contemporary English Version
But long hair is a beautiful way for a woman to cover her head.

Good News Translation
but on a woman it is a thing of beauty. Her long hair has been given her to serve as a covering.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her as a covering.

International Standard Version
nor that hair is a woman's glory, since hair is given as a substitute for coverings.

NET Bible
but if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her for a covering.

New Heart English Bible
But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her, for her hair is given to her for a covering.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
And whenever a woman grows her hair, it is a glory to her, because her hair is given to her in place of a covering.

GOD'S WORD® Translation
Doesn't it teach you that it is a woman's pride to wear her hair long? Her hair is given to her in place of a covering.

New American Standard 1977
but if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her? For her hair is given to her for a covering.

Jubilee Bible 2000
But if a woman lets her hair grow, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given her for a covering.

King James 2000 Bible
But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.

American King James Version
But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.

American Standard Version
But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.

Douay-Rheims Bible
But if a woman nourish her hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her for a covering.

Darby Bible Translation
But woman, if she have long hair, [it is] glory to her; for the long hair is given [to her] in lieu of a veil.

English Revised Version
But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.

Webster's Bible Translation
But if a woman hath long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.

Weymouth New Testament
but that if a woman has long hair it is her glory, because her hair was given her for a covering?

World English Bible
But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her, for her hair is given to her for a covering.

Young's Literal Translation
and a woman, if she have long hair, a glory it is to her, because the hair instead of a covering hath been given to her

NVM That's a pretty straight forward consensus.

Now in verse 6 and the other times where people Like Gill say that it was to have their hair covered in public assembly. Do you believe it's teaching this as a gender distinction, and also to cover up their glory which is their long uncut hair?

[rdp]

Originally Posted by 1ofthechosen

You do realize in the English and the Greek language shorn or sheer or keiro does mean to cut, to cut off, to shave? It denotes a action of something being done, but it's not an exact term. It's like saying you compromised in English. It denotes something is done, but doesn't measure it.

The word shaven is specific, denoting a length. So knowing that what is Paul saying when he clearly references creation, and then tells you to be shorn is the same as being shaven. He is simply saying "any cut" as shorn means by definition is the same as being shaven!

Matter of fact you keep fighting for a length of shorn even "to cut off" could mean 1/8 of an inch it's not specific. Thats why the CEV and the GNT say It the way they do, denoting the unspecific of the word it comes from. So it's definitely saying "to have your hair cut at all, is the same as it being shaven, and if it's a shame to be shaven, then don't cut your hair at all."

That part I don't believe is disputable, but I'm seeing a head covering too, I think it's saying both. Not either or. But uncut hair and a head covering.

But verse 15 does say "But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering."
As we know the word "for" is "anti" in the Greek. Now, I just noticed Strong says "anti" is defined as "opposite, that is instead, or because of, rarely in addition to." I never seen that before either. So is this one of those rare cases? Brother Perkins is this the only Lexicon that renders that? I'm just wondering I only have Thayer and Strong's so i'm curious.

*No sir - many-many other lexicons define this Greek term as used in this specific context as “in the place of.”

*Incidentally, if interested, I can show you how to acquire many excellent exegetical tools for quite cheap. I have shown many pastors over the years how to do this (I learned the hard way !). Can PM me for my email.

*God Bless.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by 1ofthechosen

Now in verse 6 and the other times where people Like Gill say that it was to have their hair covered in public assembly. Do you believe it's teaching this as a gender distinction, and also to cover up their glory which is their long uncut hair?

Yes, it is a gender distinction. Yes, a woman's glory ought to be covered in worship (whether corporate or private). Whose glory is to be on display in worship? Only God's. This is symbolized by the man (the image and glory of God) being uncovered, and the woman (glory of the man) being covered. So too in regards to the woman's glory - it should be covered in worship, because worship is the act of officially coming before the throne of God. In which no glory is to be displayed except God's.

[JoeBandy]

Originally Posted by rdp

*Right, saw this also. The verse preceding it is Paul's appeal to "nature" relevant to hair length...which is precisely the point I've made all along in this thread. Just another supporting quotation IMO.

Does not nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace for him,

I do not understand what Paul is saying by "nature". I have seen countless pictures of little boys going for their first hair cut with hair down the back. My cousin had twins, on boy one girl guess what, when they took the boy for a first hair cut his hair was longer than his sisters. So... males do not naturally have "short" hair.