Question
Since Paul says, "For her hair is given her for a covering'' (1 Cor. 11:15) why the insistence on a hat if the sisters allow their hair to grow long?
SOLUTION
- The issue at Corinth was not whether long or short hair was an acceptable covering, but whether or not the head was covered with a veil or hat. This is proven by the following:
- ----"Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head" (v. 4). The distinction here is obviously not between short and long-haired brethren, but rather between men with covered and uncovered heads.
- ---- Contentious sisters were provided with an alter native: either cover the head or be shorn or shaven ( v. 6). But if long hair were the intended covering, then the Apostle's alternative is meaningless.
- "Cover" ( -ed, -ing) in the A.V. disguises the fact that different words for "to cover" are used in the Greek text. The distinction between two of these, "katakalupto" and "peribolaion" proves that a veil or head covering, and not long hair is intended. These words are as follows:
- --- "Katakalupto" ( 'kata' = 'fully'; 'kalupto' = 'to cover up'), "to cover fully" ( Yg). This word occurs through out verses 5- 13 and is translated "veil" in the R.S.V.; Nestle and Marshall's "Interlinear Greek-English New Testament'' and many other versions. These translations make it plain that the issue relates to a head covering, not the growth of hair, long or short.
- -----"Peribolaion" ('peri' = 'around'; 'ballo' = 'to throw, cast'), "something cast around" ( Y g). The long hair of a woman is her glory - like a mantle cast around ( v. 15) .(8) But this is not to be displayed in the assembly of believers before the presence of God. The intended covering in the ecclesial meeting is the "katakalupto" ---- the head covering or veil.
- When Paul refers to the long hair given to the woman as her glory, he is drawing a parallel with what "nature" or common-sense suggests. This can be seen from the following:
MAN |
WOMAN |
long hair is degrading |
long hair is her glory |
therefore. a parallel is evident [natural] with the spiritual |
a man ought not to cover his head |
a woman ought to cover her head |
4. The mistaken interpretation (9) evident in the question results from reading verse 15 as if it were the conclusion of the argument rather than an additional appeal to common-sense by a parallel: what "nature itself teaches."
8. "Peribolaion" in Hebrews 1:12 is translated "vesture", A.V.; "mantle·. R.S.V.
9. The Emphatic Diaglott has contributed to the difficulty of verse 15 by its misleading translation. The Diaglott reads: "Because her hair has been given to her instead of a veil." The Greek preposition "anti" does not necessarily mean "instead of" and can mean "for." “For”·is the usual translation adopted. The rendering of "anti" by "instead of" as a possible alternative in this verse is rejected by some commentaries.
|