Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.
The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 9 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
The Life of the Early Christians  /  Head Covering  /  Discussion Questions
All Questions
Question 9
On the “long hair is the covering” objection, Bercot argues the passage becomes incoherent if “covered/uncovered” is replaced with “long/short hair,” and he stresses Paul’s switch from *katakalypto* (veil) to *peribolaion* (covering). How should this linguistic argument shape our confidence in or skepticism toward popular “Bible says X but really means Y” explanations?
Another way to ask: Bercot says the passage stops making sense if “covered/uncovered” just means “long/short hair,” and he points to Paul using different Greek words. How should this affect how much we trust popular explanations that say, “The Bible says X, but it really means Y”?

Direct Answer Bercot’s linguistic and context argument encourages skepticism toward explanations that ignore the flow of the whole passage and flatten distinct terms into one idea. It supports confidence that Paul meant a literal veil, since the grammar, logic, and Greek word choices were designed to keep “veil” distinct from “hair.”

Support from Transcript:

  • He shows incoherence if you substitute hair-length for veil: it would imply a person can have long/short hair only “when… praying or prophesying,” which “doesn’t make sense.”
  • He notes Paul’s statement “if a woman is not covered, let her also be shorn” becomes absurd if “covered” means “long hair.”
  • He criticizes the KJV/NKJV for not distinguishing terms, saying translators “could have done a better job.”
  • He points out two different Greek words: verse 13 uses “katakalypto” (uncovered/veiled), while verse 15 uses “peribolaion” (hair as a covering in the analogy).
  • He says early Christians had no confusion: “There was no issue… is he talking about long hair… or… a cloth veil? They all knew.”
Discussion Follow-ups When someone says, “The Bible says X, but it really means Y,” what tests should we apply—context, word usage, early church understanding? How much weight should we give to arguments that require the passage to become logically awkward?

Jumpstarter 9 of 10
Back Questions Next