Discussion Jumpstarter
Study leader reference - not a definitive answer
Question 4
The turning-point objection from the Chinese sister was, “If the covering is long hair… why would they cut it off?”—how does that specific logic challenge the common evangelical claim that “her hair is given for a covering” ends the discussion, and what other tensions in the passage did you notice the speaker wrestling with?
Another way to ask: How does the question “If the covering is long hair, why would they cut it off?” challenge the claim that “her hair is given for a covering” settles everything? What other problems in the passage did the speaker struggle with?
Discussion Jumpstarter
Direct Answer
Her logic challenges the idea that “hair is the covering” by pointing out Paul’s statement that if she’s “not covered” she should be “shorn”—which doesn’t fit if the covering already equals hair. The speaker also wrestles with his own contradictory explanations and the common “Corinthian prostitutes” argument he had been taught.
- The sister directly cites the tension: “if a woman is not covered, let her also be shorn… if the cover is long hair… what would she be cutting off?”
- The speaker initially used the usual evangelical proof line: “her hair is given to her as a covering,” and he admits it was “a little hard” because Shea had short hair.
- He offers the college explanation: “prostitutes in Corinth… had long flowing hair… so… Christian women… wore head coverings.”
- Then he recognizes he contradicted himself: “I just said two opposite things… they did have long hair, and they put something on their hair… just a minute ago, I said… they had a covering.”
- He notes why people accept weak explanations: “obviously… nobody wears a head covering… It must be something of the culture.”