FBF: Impossible to Persuade

Wow, where do I begin? I face a moral dilemna with this issue. On the one hand, our "brother" is confused about the original language here and needs some guidance.

On the other hand, we are warned not to rebuke certain types of people.

So, I will merely give the truth. What you do with it is up to you.

The Greek word is kome. It is the word that has been translated "long hair". It also means a neat hairdo.

The KJV translators picked one of two options. Nothing like trying to use the KJV to prove the KJV.

 

I am very curious where you have found that KOME is the correct word for long hair in verse 15.

Neat Hairdo? Do you really believe that? Have you ever seen copies of carvings of the women in the catacombs? Neat hairdos? No way!

 

I just checked both greek N.T. that I have (M.T. and USB 4th edition). They both confirm that.

So, you interpret the Scripture based on carvings in catacombs? That is very authoritative.

 

Actually, it is quite plain to me without even reading what the commentators think. These verses really are not that hard to understand. But, it seems that many here interpret them through the culture they live in.


I was pointing out that neat hairdo is ridiculous in light of what these early Christian women were pictured looking like. I think they understood exactly what these Scriptures meant.

 

1. I don't care what the commentators think either. I mentioned the Greek N.T. That is not a commentary. That is what the N.T. originally looked like.

2. Agreed.

3. Some do.

4. That is an issue you will have to take up with God. He chose to use that word, not me.

You mean they weren't wearing head coverings (of which I am not against)?

5. I think so too. I just choose to put my faith in interpretation and not carvings.

 

I will just answer the one about the coverings. Yes, they were shown as veiled.


http://www.charityministries.org/tapeministry/book-veiled.cfm#Chapter%205

http://truthinheart.com/Veils1.gif

http://truthinheart.com/Veils2.gif

http://truthinheart.com/Veils3.gif

http://www.charityministries.org/tapeministry/book-veiled.cfm#Chapter%205

Well, this may surprise some people here but we have anther translation other the KJV in our home and it says long hair as well as the KJV.

I have faith that my God would have put the words neat hairdo in one of these translations if he had meant neat hairdo. Frankly, it does not go with the rest of the Scripture either. Shaved and shorn is a shame and then all of a sudden it is now a neat hairdo. Long means long. Modest means neat.

Well, you have got my going tonight so I have my Vines out along side my Bible.

And my Vines says that Kome does not mean neat hairdo. Mine says, "The word found in 1 Cor 11:15, where context shows that the "covering," provided in the long "hair" of a woman is a veil, a sign of subjection to authority, as indicated in the headship spoken of in vv.1-10.

Then it says Komao signifies "to let the hair grow long, to wear, long hair," a glory to a woman, a dishonor to a man (as taught by nature), 1 Cor 11:14,15)

No neat hairdos here.

 

HCL, God did not do any of the translations. Part of the reason we study the Bible is for understanding.

Btw, your dictionary usage fell short. Kome is a derivitive of Komizo. Komizo means - to care for, take care of, provide for. So, when you combine its usage with hair, you have what I have already said.

The implication of what I said makes sense. If you use yours, then you can NEVER cut your hair, any of it. Surely you understand that women with long hair must keep it as neat as possible, right? I mean, there isn't a lot of glory around someone who just stuck her finger in a light socket.

This is another case where the strict "word (albeit incomplete) study fails to in and of itself prove a position. You must consider what I just said. Since I know you agree with the last two lines of the previous paragraph, you must extend your interpretation to fit the theological issue.

 

Great set of pictures. I will stick to the source of absolute truth, the Scripture. On the plus side, I did always wonder what Christ looked like.

 

Well, I believe that I have extended my interpretation to fit the theological issue. A woman is to have long hair and men are to have short. Women are to cover their long hair with a visible covering as a symbol for the angels that they recognize God's order of creation. Pretty simple, I am not sure why so many want to complicate the issue.

I know that it is not practiced in this culture as it was for so many years. But, the verses are very plain in English. And I personally believe that God did guide the men to translate the Scriptures to English so that we might have them to read. I know that the original inspired texts were not in English.

I never said that the English was the original, however, I trust God enough to know that He has given me a Bible that I can understand and these verses are very plain and clear.

A neat hairdo is much easier for our militant feminst culture to swallow. Veils just don't fit in our, "You've come a long way baby," culture.

Quote from,"Let Her be Veiled," by Tom Shank:
Why do you wear that thing on your head?", is a question which many a faithful sister has been asked, and one which we want to address in this study. The fact that so many Christians don't know the reason for the wearing of the head veiling is a sad commentary on the state of the church in this late day, especially when the inquirer claims to be a Bible believing and following Christian. With the 'religion' of humanism infiltrating every segment of society arid the church, with its inverted doctrines and egocentric mentality, It is no small wonder that many foundational biblical principles have been lost sight of and therefore their applications explained away. Survey a host of Bible commentaries on 1 Corinthians 11 and you will find that generally only since the beginning of this century has the practice of wearing the veiling been interpreted away by liberal scholars, and the church has followed their lead. Woe to the shepherds and leaders who are alluded to In Song of Solomon 5:7: "

Another quote from, "Let her be Veiled," Shank:
"

Satan and his cohorts hate the head covering because of what it represents; it reminds them and puts them to shame because of their own rejection of God's headship. Faithful, veiled sisters also represent the church, which covers Its glory, "...to the intent that now the manifold wisdom of God might be made known by the church to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places." (Ep. 3:10). What a high calling the sisters have in exemplifying the submissive, obedient church as it reproves the fallen angels!"

[ May 02, 2003, 02:54 AM: Message edited by: Headcoveredlady ]

 

HCL: I respect the fact that you choose to wear a veil over your hair. I have no problem with that. To me, it is not a doctrinal issue.

However, please do not call those of us who choose NOT to wear a veil part of the 'militant feminist culture'. I do not subscribe to either of these premises.

Jesus was tolerant. Should we not be also?

Blessings,
Sue

 

Add to the above:

2865 -- to care for, take care of, provide for . . .

2866 -- neat, elegant, nice, fine . . .

This is not to say that I have studied these
Scriptures and found these words used; I have not
studied this Scripture at all, at any time.

It is just that I have often found that people often
use only those references, words, etc. which are
convenient for them to put their own ideas across,
often ignoring the clear intentions of the writers.

 

And the beat goes on.......

Please remember those that lose their hair because of illness.

Please do not stoop to name calling of those of us who do not choose to wear our hair long or wear hair coverings, hats, or veils.

If a person is called "?" to wear long hair, veils, then I respect them and I do not make fun of them, etc. etc. etc., but I do not like it when that person looks down her nose at me and says that I am not a Christian or that I am a Satan Follower when I do not believe the same way.

Please show the same respect for me and others.

I am very open minded to the teachings of the Bible. And I am continuing to learn. Further I don't think anyone is rejecting the KJV, but they may be rejecting what one thinks is the clear teachings of the KJV, but
no amount of agrument is ever going to convince me that every woman should wear long hair and a veil.

 

I was thinking about this as I woke up this morning and am saddened continually that there are those who believe that Paul actually spent sixteen verses talking about a symbol of headship just to say, "Ladies have a neat hairdo." If he would have meant JUST have a neat hairdo than he would have written that. But, instead he spent sixteen verses talking about the importance of this issue.

Sue, I don't think you are a militant feminist.

 

HCL --

I took a quick look at 1 Cor 11, and verse 15 really
struck me. What shall be done with it, in the light
of wearing veils. This verse even makes me think
that it could be that I should NOT wear a veil when
I am called to the Torah.

 

Abiyah,
I know that you have read the whole section in context. Please re-read verse six a long with all the rest and then tell me what you think.

In my understanding the hair is the covering given in the natural realm. It is nature teaching us that long hair is a glory to women.

Also unsaved women have long hair too, so that would not be a distinguishing mark.

And then men would have to never have hair.

And praying and prophesying is an act. So, one cannot have long hair one minute and then short when not praying or prophesying.


They would have to remove it.

 

hcl,

i loved reading about how you have followed the plain words of the bible without grasping for excuses. your take is certainly the same sense i took these verses in when i first read them - at the time, i wondered, so why don't women do this? it's nice to know that there are some who actually do.

people (yep, that includes me) will kick and scream and do whatever it takes to ignore the parts of the bible they don't like.

it seems most of the time people go scrambling to the greek/hebrew to find some way to not have to do something diffcult the bible plainly commands. i have done this myself, on much larger issues, but never again, with god's help.

if this offends anyone, prayerfully consider why. just perhaps the bible means what it plainly says in our english translation.

 

1. He did not spend sixteen verses to JUST say to have a neat hairdo. I have already explained this. Whether you believe it or not is up to you. The root word for kome means to take care of. So, if you have long hair, it must be neat. If for some reason you do not have long hair, it must be neat.

Now, as I have also pointed out, just because a statement is made in a positive sense, does not mean the reciprocal is true. This is basic stuff here.

If you tell your child that he did well today in school and on his chores, does that mean that yesterday he was a rebellious hellion? Of course not.

If I tell my wife she looks beautiful (and she does) today, that does not mean or even implay that the opposite is true for yesterday.

It is said in Scripture that the glory of young men is their strength and the glory of old men is their gray hair. Not every young man is strong (for one reason or another) and not all old men even have hair.

I hope we can move on now.

2. Paul could have gone into painful detail with a lot of his sayings. Don't assume that your english translation fully captures the original intent and meaning. That is why we strive for proper interpretation. Remember, Peter considered some of Paul's writings to be "hard".

3. He spent 16 verses on the issue of authority and submission. The covering aspect is but a part of it.

 

Timothy --

I find it odd that people would criticize going back
to the original languages to get to the bottom of
what the Scriptures mean! Why is that? Why
would anyone recommend that we study the
Bible, which was not written in English, only in
English?

If you had to dismantle a Israeli bomb, and the
original instructions for dismantling the bomb
were written in Hebrew by the author, but there
was a manual writen in English which often erred,
what would you do? Insist on using the English
one, even though you could read Hebrew? The
Bible is bigger and of more importance than a
bomb.