Probably the most scholarly words in the Oneness Apostolic churches I have ever seen written on 1 Corinthians 11- otherwise known as the “hair chapter”- is from The Literal Word by M.D. Treece. Most writings on the subject are filled with anecdotes and circular reasoning and don’t very much address the claim that women’s hair must be uncut. It is often mentioned with little evidence. I have to give M.D. Treece credit for trying to tackle this issue.
(Disclaimer: The verses in 1 Corinthians 11, taken by themselves, do not address the fact that women were allowed to shave their heads in the Old Testament when they took the Nazarite vow. The actual meaning of the verses in 1 Corinthians 11 are a widely debated topic among scholars and what is demonstrated here is simply how M.D. Treece’s own logic does not make sense within itself. It does not demonstrate or argue whether or not M.D. Treece is right or wrong about his beliefs and translations otherwise concerning hair/veils/having hair down the head/customs of the day or any other assertion.)
He translates verse number 4 “Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoreth his head” as “And every man praying or prophesying having hair down his head disgraces his head.” (pg 247) I have a photo of his comments on this so you can read his comments on it for yourself below.
So, he translates the word covered as “having hair down his head”. On page 249, he begins to look at the word “uncovered.” He says the covering is hair and not a literal veil. He says “That is the central theme of this discourse.”
The real focus here is going to be on vs 6 “For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn; but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered.” He translates this as “For if a woman is not covered, let her hair be cut; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved, let her be covered.”
Let’s look at this closely a minute. He defines “covered” for a man as “having hair down his head.” So, let’s insert that definition into his translation and see if it works:
“For if a woman doesn’t have hair down her head, let her hair be cut, but if it’s disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved, let her have hair down her head.”- Doesn’t make much sense does it?
First of all, I have read that some people want to say that the word shorn means “to cut.” There is a difference between the words shorn and shaven. We know what shaven means but what does it mean to be “shorn?”
According to Thayer’s Greek Lexicon, it means “absolutely, of shearing or cutting short the hair of the head”. See below:
STRONGS NT 2751: κείρω
κείρω; (1 aorist ἐκειρα (Acts 8:32 T WH marginal reading)); 1 aorist middle ἐκειραμην; from Homer down; to shear: a sheep, Acts 8:32 ((cf. above) from Isaiah 53:7). Middle to get or let be shorn (Winers Grammar, § 38, 2 b.; Buttmann, § 135, 4): τήν κεφαλήν, Acts 18:18; absolutely, of shearing or cutting short the hair of the head, 1 Corinthians 11:6 (cf. Winer’s Grammar, § 43, 1).
It means to shear like a sheep, or like a military haircut.
Let’s look at M.D. Treece’s translation and see if it makes sense when we insert these definitions:
“For if a woman doesn’t have hair down her head, let her hair be shorn like a sheep, but if it’s disgraceful for a woman to have her hair shorn like a sheep, or shaved, let her have hair down her head.”
This makes much more sense, doesn’t it? If these definitions are used, not only does the translation make sense but it also means that there is no prohibition against women cutting their hair.
Every single argument for uncut hair is based on the idea that the word shorn means a little trim, but we can clearly see that this is not what the word means simply by looking at the definition in the Greek Lexicon. If you read arguments for women’s uncut hair, this foundational argument is often skimmed over and the anecdotal arguments and circular reasoning begins with a lot of fear sprinkled in about what is going to happen to you if you disagree. But when we put aside the fear and traditional teachings we can clearly see that the word shorn means to shear like a sheep and does not mean what some are saying it means.
I have provided photos of four pages. Page 247, page 248, page 249, page 250.
(Written for the Facebook group Breaking Out.)
Getting Out the Old Books: Guardians of His Glory by Gary & Linda Reed
Getting Out the Old Books: David F. Gray
Getting Out the Old Books: Joy Haney
Getting Out The Old Books: Larry L. Booker
Getting Out the Old Books: Power Before the Throne
Getting Out the Newer Books: Wholly Holy: The Vital Role of Visible Devotion
Search For Truth On Holiness
********
Shop at our Amazon store! As an Amazon Influencer, this website earns from qualifying purchases.
Your trying to twist Gods Word for your own beliefs. If you just don’t want to take the Word as truth get a NIV or just do what most so called Cristians (Christ like) do and avoid those chapters and play church. Cause twisting it to suit your inadequacies to live by its teachings completely and whole heartedly will just get you spewed out. I’d suggest either when your studying any of Gods Word to not start with a preconception on what you’ll find. Pray first, ask the Lord to open your heart and mind and then study what it says, and don’t trust the secular translations so much. Marvin Treece was an expert in Hebrew,Ancient Hebrew, Greek, Arbic And many other languages! And you think you know more by a 15 minute study with a Strong’s concordance or Brown-driver-Brigg’s definitions and I’m guessing from an APP. I can’t define Holiness or a women’s hair but I think a man of God like Marvin Treece could much better than any google expert in this last day Corinthian big grace church age. And I’ll say one more thing, I wouldn’t want to be putting out slanderous accusations against a tried and seasoned pillar of doctrine and Saint even if they’ve passed on or even if they was wrong but I suspect that he is much closer to the truth than many. An would not put anything out that if you’re wrong you will have to answer for one day. What if you are and someone is hindered by this?? I am no expert on the Bible, I couldn’t soundly give any doctored, I’ll stick to my own salvation. But am just warning you to do the same. God bless in Jesus Name!
Well said!
So, what you’re saying here is that we just blindly follow a man that preaches and gives his opinion on an interpretation of scripture rather than studying the Word as it is instructed for us to do in the Word? Thus removing biblical instruction, which is prohibited in the Word and is as bad as adding your own opinions/agendas to the Word. Maybe you missed that part or you are also twisting the Word to your liking. It seems you would rather not do the work of studying to show yourself approved. It’s also very uneducated and shows your lack of knowledge to think that KJV is the only valid translation. Did you know KJV was interpreted for one of the most vile Kings in history to back up his agenda? I actually do read KJV, but you have to read multiple versions to actually study as well as search the true Hebrew meaning of words and phrases, which the author of this post is doing. Research 101 is taught in elementary school. While I always respect what my pastor preaches, even he, a highly educated multi-degreed pastor, tells us that we must study the Word and seek our own convictions in the Word as we are also anointed by the Power of the Holy Ghost. True leaders do not want you to blindly follow them. They teach and empower through the Word. It does nobody any good to remain uneducated and also refuse to use the Holy Ghost as your guide of discernment when studying the Word. You are held accountable to seek, pray, and apply. The author is doing what the Bible instructs and has every bit as much right as Treece to document their findings. They also didn’t give a slanderous accusation of a “seasoned pillar” which is honestly laughable. The things you said about the writer was an attack based on your desperate need to cling to what you have obviously digested and been indoctrinated with for a long time. They didn’t say you have to go out and cut your hair to be saved. They simply gave a breakdown of their study of a narrative we have been indoctrinated with in a search for their own understanding. Nothing you posted in your rebuttal was rooted in your own study of the Word, but simply what you’ve been told. I feel like I just read the same uneducated sermons that I’ve heard my entire life. We have to do better. God Bless!