Uncut Hair and the Nazirite Vow for Women

[Costeon]

Originally Posted by rdp

[COLOR="Blue"][FONT="Georgia"]

*Next, you're making an equivocation fallacy by appealing to - and subsequently applying - to a woman what is said of a man (e.g., Paul's vow). As you said above, context is the determiner of word meanings. Yet you abandon this principle in I Cor. 11.

In your response, please include why BDAG and USB do not distinguish between men and women as you do.

[Costeon]

Originally Posted by rdp

BDAG: κείρω fut. 2 sg. κερεῖς Pr 27:25; 1 aor. ἔκειρα; aor. mid. ἐκειράμην. Pass.: 2 aor. inf. καρῆναι (TestJob 9:3); pf. ptc. κεκαρμένος LXX (Hom. et al.; ins, pap, LXX; Jos., Bell. 6, 5; SibOr 3, 359) shear a sheep (Artem. 4, 51 πρόβατον; Babrius 51, 3; Jos., Ant. 6, 297 after 1 Km 25:2; TestJud 12:1) ὁ κείρας (v.l. ὁ κείρων [Aesop, Fab. 212 P.=382 H.]) Ac 8:32; 1 Cl 16:7; B 5:2 (all three after Is 53:7, where both readings are found) the shearer. Mid. cut one’s hair or have one’s hair cut (B-D-F §317; Rob. 809.–X., Hell. 1, 7, 8.) τὴν κεφαλήν have one’s hair cut (as the result of a vow; s. εὐχή 2) Ac 18:18. Abs. (Quint. Smyrn. 3, 686 and 688) 1 Cor 11:6ab.–DELG. M-M.

UBS, A Handbook for Greek NT Translators: To be shorn, literally "cut-her-hair" in Greek, probably referred to a regular trimming of her hair.

*Much more info. on my blog. Be back soon.
[/FONT][/COLOR]

Without having my BDAG it's hard to decipher all the abbreviations, but I note the following:
Proverbs 27:25, which is about cutting and gathering hay.
It mentions not surprisingly the shearing of sheep/shearer, and notes the verse in Acts that I've mentioned.
It mentions one having his hair cut and specifies this is as the result of a vow and notes the verse in Acts I've mentioned.
And then it lists 1 Cor 11.6.

So the point of all this is that all the examples given in BDAG about hair, besides one, is clearly about removing the hair not merely trimming.

I don't see that it lists any other verses that just mean to cut. In short they provide no other support for that definition. That means it has to be based on an interpretation of the passage--and of course there are other interpretations like Fee's.

So one may mean just to cut.

But as I've noted the context makes that highly unlikely.

What major commentaries render this verb as just to cut?

What evidence does the UBS handbook give for its assertion?

[Costeon]

And, rdp, why do you suppose that no modern translation follows the UBS Handbook for Greek NT Translators? None of them translate this verb as "to cut" or "to regularly trim" but some variation of "to cut off"? See for example the ESV, NIV, NASB, NRSV, and for kicks, see the NLT.

[Esaias]

What's interesting is the idea of "cutting the hair". In most people's conversation, this means more than a 1 inch trim of the ends. If a woman trimmed her split ends, nobody would say "Oh, you got a hair cut!" unless the hair was shortened significantly.

Thus, when reading older historical records speaking of how women "did not cut their hair", it is not conclusive that they did not occasionally trim a bit off the ends to manage split ends, etc. It is more likely meaning they did not cut their hair so as to significantly reduce it's apparent length.

Of course, trimming split ends cannot be ruled out, either, unless there is specific mention of that. I have been searching for documentation concerning this, and unfortunately cannot find anything other than references to "cutting", without more specificity as to exactly how much is being referred to.

So, I think both sides of the debate need more specific documentation. An older document referring specifically to "trimming a tiny amount" would be most helpful.

[Costeon]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Thus, when reading older historical records speaking of how women "did not cut their hair", it is not conclusive that they did not occasionally trim a bit off the ends to manage split ends, etc. It is more likely meaning they did not cut their hair so as to significantly reduce it's apparent length.

I was just talking to a friend about this today. Generally when I've heard UPCI preachers (this is whom I am familiar with) talk about the history of cutting hair, they have said something to the effect that nobody cut their hair (just look at the pictures!) before the 1920s when many women started to 'bob' their hair." And they point out that there was an uproar against the practice. But I wondered if the uproar was not over simply cutting it (while it still remained long), but specifically that it was being cut very short in a boyish fashion. It's hard to see why people would get in an uproar over a woman's cut hair that was still down her back and capable of being put up since it would still be so feminine. It's easy, however, to see why people would freak out over such a sharp change in custom--along with everything else these "bobbed" women participated in.

Of course, trimming split ends cannot be ruled out, either, unless there is specific mention of that. I have been searching for documentation concerning this, and unfortunately cannot find anything other than references to "cutting", without more specificity as to exactly how much is being referred to.

Yes I haven't found any either. I only have friends who had relatives who were alive during the merger of the UPCI who said the uncut thing did not really get insisted on till the 60s (maybe the later 50s).

An older document referring specifically to "trimming a tiny amount" would be most helpful.

Indeed. :-)

[Costeon]

As far as the definition of "shorn" being different for males, females, and I guess sheep--for male humans and sheep, according to rdp, it refers to cutting off the hair (or wool), but for female humans, it refers to cutting it at all, Fee does point out a couple of examples in the writer Lucian, who wrote in the Koine period, where this verb translated "shorn" is used of females to mean to cut the hair very close.

"Two texts in Lucian illustrate that short hair on a woman was considered 'mannish': of a fugitive wife in the company of three runaway slaves, 'a woman with her hair closely clipped (kekarmenen) in the Spartan style, boyish-looking and quite masculine' (fug. 27; Loeb, V, 85); and of a Lesbian woman Megilla, who after pulling off her wig revealed 'the skin of her head which was shaved close (apokekarmene), just as on the most energetic of athletes' (dial.het. 5.3; Loeb, VII, 383). The homosexuality involved in this dialogue demonstrates where the 'shame' lay" (p. 511).

So in the Koine period, for both males and females (and sheep) the verb translated as "shorn" in 1 Cor 11.6 could and did refer to cutting the hair close.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Costeon

In your response, please include why BDAG and USB do not distinguish between men and women as you do.

*I do not have the time to just sit here & chase your smoke screens & diversionary tactics. But, here, I'll bite at this one (since it's too easy to pass up): (i) You are arguing from silence when you ask me to provide a negative. (ii) According to your own hermeneutic context always defines word-meanings. BDAG, UBS, Bauer, ALGNT, etc. ad nauseum appeal to the verb (pay close attention to this right here) as used in I Cor. 11.6, which is clearly describing a woman (contra Paul, a man in Acts).

*I could just as easily appeal to the LXX's usage of the noun "long" (κόμην) in Numbers 6.5 as applied to a man in the following conjunctive phrase/clause: "and he must let the locks of hair on his head grow long."

*Will you be consistent & now apply this term to man in the NT, arguing from the identical premise that men can wear long hair - since we apparently cannot accept the plain language of I Cor. 11? Why not?

*Now, perhaps you can point us to where BDAG, UBS, Bauer, L&N, ALGNT state that this passage is defined as "to cut short" as you have claimed:_________? Waiting.

Originally Posted by Costeon

Without having my BDAG it's hard to decipher all the abbreviations, but I note the following:
Proverbs 27:25, which is about cutting and gathering hay.
It mentions not surprisingly the shearing of sheep/shearer, and notes the verse in Acts that I've mentioned.
It mentions one having his hair cut and specifies this is as the result of a vow and notes the verse in Acts I've mentioned.
And then it lists 1 Cor 11.6.

So the point of all this is that all the examples given in BDAG about hair, besides one, is clearly about removing the hair not merely trimming.

I don't see that it lists any other verses that just mean to cut. In short they provide no other support for that definition. That means it has to be based on an interpretation of the passage--and of course there are other interpretations like Fee's.

So one may mean just to cut.

But as I've noted the context makes that highly unlikely.

What major commentaries render this verb as just to cut?

What evidence does the UBS handbook give for its assertion?

*UBS specifically states that the Greek "literally [means] to cut one's hair" or "to trim" the hair (polar opp. your claim above). Not sure exactly what evidence from "the Greek Bible" you're wanting if you will not accept these standard authorities & professional linguists (?).

*I have supplied the clear references that you asked for, and yet you don't like these linguist's assertions so you have now began to deny their clear words. You have repeatedly stated that the verb in question "does not mean" simply "to cut or trim the hair." Yet, this is the polar opposite of what these standard lexical authorities & linguists state. Do you agree w. these professional linguists or disagree? If the latter pls. provide exegetical reasons for you claims.

*"Major commentaries" have the weight of Matthew Henry to me - i.e., useless (unless you wish to juxtapose them alongside God-breathed Scripture?).

Originally Posted by Costeon

And, rdp, why do you suppose that no modern translation follows the UBS Handbook for Greek NT Translators? None of them translate this verb as "to cut" or "to regularly trim" but some variation of "to cut off"? See for example the ESV, NIV, NASB, NRSV, and for kicks, see the NLT.

*This is rather odd since I specifically appealed to some of the same renderings in my blog piece (that you continue to ignore).

*As anyone can plainly read in the link below (& my blog), many translations do indeed render this verb as simply "to cut." I find it quite enlightening that you now have now resorted to deriding UBS (a highly reputable grammatical resource). You simply have your mind set against the grammatical evidence. Shall I post some diagrams?

http://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/11-6.htm

*Back soon w. much more data.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Costeon

As far as the definition of "shorn" being different for males, females, and I guess sheep--for male humans and sheep, according to rdp, it refers to cutting off the hair (or wool), but for female humans, it refers to cutting it at all, Fee does point out a couple of examples in the writer Lucian, who wrote in the Koine period, where this verb translated "shorn" is used of females to mean to cut the hair very close.

"Two texts in Lucian illustrate that short hair on a woman was considered 'mannish': of a fugitive wife in the company of three runaway slaves, 'a woman with her hair closely clipped (kekarmenen) in the Spartan style, boyish-looking and quite masculine' (fug. 27; Loeb, V, 85); and of a Lesbian woman Megilla, who after pulling off her wig revealed 'the skin of her head which was shaved close (apokekarmene), just as on the most energetic of athletes' (dial.het. 5.3; Loeb, VII, 383). The homosexuality involved in this dialogue demonstrates where the 'shame' lay" (p. 511).

So in the Koine period, for both males and females (and sheep) the verb translated as "shorn" in 1 Cor 11.6 could and did refer to cutting the hair close.

*Once again your bias is demonstrated. Using your identical logic, the Greek word for "long" is okayed for men in the NT since we cannot distinguish between gender-applications of terms (do you believe Christian men should wear dresses?). Won't the hippies be elated to know that they now don't have to "cut" their hair !?

*I should also point out that the Greek terms κείρασθαι ἢ ξυρᾶσθαι are different roots and hence not cognates as you have repeatedly intimated. And, the passages from Acts (18) & I Cor. (11) are inflected differently. The former is aorist, middle, participle, nominative, masculine, singular - applied to a man, while the latter is aorist, middle, infinitive - applied to a woman. Quite the difference!

*In fact, I would turn this assertion diametrically on its head regarding the Koine' period & state that both the standard lexicons & linguists clearly state that the verb translated "shorn" in the midd. voice defines as simply "to cut or trim the hair" - w. absolutely nothing stated about "cutting the hair short" as Costeon is claiming. This rendering is necessarily force-fed into the lexical data, while never stated by the same (i.e., eisegesis).

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Esaias

What's interesting is the idea of "cutting the hair". In most people's conversation, this means more than a 1 inch trim of the ends. If a woman trimmed her split ends, nobody would say "Oh, you got a hair cut!" unless the hair was shortened significantly.

Thus, when reading older historical records speaking of how women "did not cut their hair", it is not conclusive that they did not occasionally trim a bit off the ends to manage split ends, etc. It is more likely meaning they did not cut their hair so as to significantly reduce it's apparent length.

Of course, trimming split ends cannot be ruled out, either, unless there is specific mention of that. I have been searching for documentation concerning this, and unfortunately cannot find anything other than references to "cutting", without more specificity as to exactly how much is being referred to.

So, I think both sides of the debate need more specific documentation. An older document referring specifically to "trimming a tiny amount" would be most helpful.

*Although I differ w. the ultimate conclusion here, this is a balanced and fair post IMO.

[rdp]

*Incidentally, I just happened across this quote today:

**(Exegetical Dictionary of the Greek NT): 1 Cor 11:15b: "For [long] hair is given to her in place of a veil."