Biblical Hair Study

[TRFrance]

Originally Posted by Rev

(I Co 11:6) εἰ γὰρ οὐ κατακαλύπτεται γυνή, καὶ κειράσθω: εἰ δὲ αἰσχρὸν γυναικὶ τὸ κείρασθαι (root word being (κείρω) ἢ ξυρᾶσθαι, κατακαλυπτέσθω.

Not sure where you came up with your translation?

Why are you still arguing about this, and what point are you trying to prove now?

Originally Posted by Rev

Not sure where you came up with your translation?

My translation? What translation are you referring to ?

Originally Posted by Neckstadt

None of the following are sin...... Shame, Shorn, Shaven, Prophesieth, Covering.

None of it adds up to sin.

If it were a sin the Apostle you choose to lable the commandment Apostle (Paul) does not call it a Sin.

verse 16 shows that the Church did not start the "custom".

As for the old testement.

Samson had long hair as a man....

So get away from using the old testement for new testement vows....

If he wanted the woman not to cut their hair in the old testement, he would have wanted the old testement men to have short hair.

End of the day cut hair puts no one into hell or into heaven for not cutting your hair.....

At the end of your writings what is your conclusion "Standard" to measure holiness or Sin?

Tell us your conclusion and not the why or why not?

Neck

I agree with you for the most part brother. Thanks for sharing.

Originally Posted by Scott Hutchinson

Does not shorn and shaven imply closely cropped and being bald such as one cutting all their hair off ?

Yes it does Brother.

Originally Posted by TRFrance

Benincasa, if I can clarify what it seems like Scott might have been suggesting here ... (Scott, correct me if I'm off on this)

Paul says a woman's hair should not be shorn (greek word - keiro). The literal word there is shorn (grk - keiro), not cut (grk - copto). So if a woman's hair was way down her back, then she cut it to shoulder length, the hair would still be long, even though it had been cut. But it would not have been shorn, since shorn refers to hair being cut very close-cropped. Thus, she would still be gender distinctive in her appearance, as opposed to her husband who would have short hair.

...

Exactly. I was trying to find the greek word for UNCUT and it looks like you found it! Great work.

[TRFrance]

Originally Posted by Walkbyfaith7

Exactly. I was trying to find the greek word for UNCUT and it looks like you found it! Great work.

Just to clarify,the verb kopto means "cut" (that is, "to cut"), not "uncut".
I went ahead and edited my original post to remove any ambiguity.

The word akoptos would mean uncut, although it doesn't appear in the NT.

Originally Posted by TRFrance

Just to clarify,the verb kopto means "cut" (that is, "to cut"), not "uncut".
I went ahead and edited my original post to remove any ambiguity.

The word akoptos would mean uncut, although it doesn't appear in the NT.

If the Greek word uncut isn't there kind of makes you wonder why some are stuck on uncut hair?

I mean, I agree the scripture states a woman must have long hair-just like it says.

Thanks for the clarification.

[HeavenlyOne]

Originally Posted by Coonskinner

And for those who want to say, "Well, it is a shame, but not a sin," you ought to do a word study on that Greek word, and look at some of the other places words translated shame are used, words from that same root.

And see if that is the company you want to keep.

It's a shame for women to speak in the church. That's scripture, loud and clear, yet we don't follow that. The same word for 'shame' in that verse is the same one used in the hair chapter.

In addition, cutting the hair at all isn't cutting it off, nor is it shaving or having one's head shorn. There is a big difference, whether one wants to admit it or not.

And finally, I have yet to see anyone tie in Hebrew traditions (or whatever you want to call them) with Corinthian ones. IOW, I have not seen anything that says a shaved head on a woman in Corinth was seen the same as a shaved head on a Hebrew woman. Cultures varied then as they do now.

But I do admire the study, even if I don't agree that one has anything to do with the other.

[HeavenlyOne]

Originally Posted by Sister Alvear

I think we have had books written on hair from this forum and past forums...
Wonder if anyone ever changed their mind or their opinion? Kinda like the women preacher threads or wine or grape juice christmas celebrations or no christmas ...We all have our opinion what the Bible teaches and what issues are heaven and hell issues...I just pray that where ever I am failing the Judge will show me mercy.

I hope HE is not as hard and cutting as some people I have met along life's climb....

Lots of people have changed their minds on this issue. I have received two PMs from AFF members in the last couple weeks about it.

Originally Posted by HeavenlyOne

Lots of people have changed their minds on this issue. I have received two PMs from AFF members in the last couple weeks about it.

Wow, thanks for sharing. Keep on preaching the truth but be quiet in the church for it's a shame for a woman....well, nevermind.

[HeavenlyOne]

Originally Posted by TRFrance

"Paul called it a shame, but not a sin", [so therefore its ok?] ?? What kind of argument is that?

I keep hearing people say that it was a shame, but not a sin for a man to have long hair.

Even if that were the case, why would any Christian want to do something the bible describes as being a shame? Makes no sense to me.

...

No women speaking in the church. Remember that on Sunday!