English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

1 Corinthians 11:14
"Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, "

Even if it was just a portrayal of Jesus, why would you permit a sinful portrayal in your churches?

2006-11-05 14:12:56 · 14 answers · asked by Alucard 4 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

14 answers

Hair

by Jeffrey W. Hamilton

"Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, but if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering." I Corinthians 11:14-15

Have you stopped and wonder why some men insist on wearing their hair long? Back during the 1960s, when long hair became very popular among the nation's youth, a leader in this movement made this statement:

"Young kids identify short hair with authority, discipline, unhappiness, boredom, rigidity, hatred of life - and long hair with letting go. Wherever we go, our long hair tells people where we stand on Vietnam, Wallace, campus disruptions, dope. We're living commercials for the revolution. Long hair is the beginning of our liberation from the sexual oppression that underlies the whole military society."

In other words, Jerry Rubin, who made this statement, believes that his long hair was a symbol of his rejection of society and moral living. Now, I'm not implying that every male who wears his hair long has the same intentions, but he is identifying himself with people who do not agree with God's moral law.

The verses that are quoted above were written by the apostle Paul. It seems to be very clear, but many questions do come up. Like, how long is long? Is anything longer than a crew cut shameful? Or can we consider hair cut about shoulder's length short?

"Short" or "long" are relative terms. God is not dictating a specific length of hair. Instead, he is insisting that the prevailing hair styles among men is to be shorter than the prevailing hair styles among women. Since the beginning of time, God expected a distinction to be made between the sexes. For example, in the law of Moses, God said "A woman must not wear men's clothing, nor a man wear women's clothing, for the Lord your God detests anyone who does this." (Deuteronomy 22:5) Other than articles of clothing, the relative length of hair is the most distinctive difference between men and women. If the hair on a man leaves you wondering whether the person is a he or a she, then the hair is too long.

Your deliberate misrepresentation of Biblical verse is foolish. You confuse different eras, apply standards of different cultures to each other when they are not comparable, and give the same tired argument that "It's in the Bible, therefore you're wrong because you don't do it just like that and thus all Christianity is wrong".

What a childish rant. Pulling out a few quotes from the Bible has certainly NOT made you a scholar.

2006-11-05 14:27:42 · answer #1 · answered by mckenziecalhoun 7 · 2 2

Well i believe it has to do with God and being able to identify in a physical way, Gods people and the rest of the nations.

The portrayal is only that a portrayal. It is possible that their hair in those days may of went to their ear lobes or by their neck. But not the same as a woman. Think of this it is a sort of a sacrifice on a person's behalf to do such things for God.

2006-11-05 14:18:40 · answer #2 · answered by fire 5 · 1 0

While it is true that some pre-Christian peoples had long Hair such as Samson that was because he wasa Nazarite not to be confused with a Nazarene 2 entirely different things in the case ot the Nazarites you had two types one that took a vow for a specified length of time and a Nazarite from birth a life time vow as was the Case in Samson he was a Nazarite from Birth since nobody knows what Jesus looked like as there were no cameras or paintings we know that he followed the Scripture and that he would NOT HAVE LONG HAIR hope that clears up that point thanks Gorbalizer

2006-11-05 15:53:00 · answer #3 · answered by gorbalizer 5 · 0 0

We don't know that He did have long hair. I don't know why they portrayed Him that way ... our church has no picture of Jesus anywhere in the church.

But the verse that you speak of about a man having long hair, is sort of taken out of context, I think. What I mean is that if you read the verses previously, the whole discussion is about approaching God with humility. It's basically talking about whether people should cover their heads when they pray, and Paul is giving the Corinthians guidelines to go by.

I may be wrong (I often am) but i interpret that particular verse as meaning men who are full of vanity and so wear their hair like a woman's. He's not so much discussing actual hair length as he's saying it's a disgrace to be so vain in front of God.

Hope that helps.

2006-11-05 14:27:39 · answer #4 · answered by arewethereyet 7 · 2 0

The bible gives no physical description of Jesus, but we can be confident that if long hair is a disgrace to a man, Jesus wouldn't have had long hair. The artist's renditions of Jesus came along hundreds of years after he left his earthly assignment. We can also assume that Jesus was not some frail looking creature, because he traveled extensively by foot, and was a carpenter by trade (not for weeklings, especially before power tools)
hope this helps : )

2006-11-05 14:20:32 · answer #5 · answered by Geek Freek 1 · 2 0

I don't believe the Scripture there refers to Jews, as 1st Cor was written to a Gentile Church regarding a Question on Customs for women to have their heads covered to show proper respect to their husband. In Jewish Worship, the men have their heads covered, to show respect to G-d. Further, the custom of the day in 1st Century was for men's hair to be "polled", which is to have it gathered at the nape of the neck & cut off at that point. The Bible refers to this custom when David's son Absalom had his hair cut every year, in the Books of the Kings. One other item, in 1st Cor Chapter 11, Paul ends his discourse on the subject with, "If any man seems contentious on this matter,(wishes to argue on this) we have no such custom, neither the Churches of God." Paul saw this as a non-issue and not worthy of "splitting hairs" (pardon the pun) or the Church over it. God Bless, Pastor "B"

2006-11-05 14:16:27 · answer #6 · answered by ballardbutch 5 · 1 0

sure the previous testomony 'version' of the 'Bible' does say that...properly, some imposter guy named 'Paul'. He reported in Corinthians that that's a shame for a guy to positioned on long hair. in spite of the incontrovertible fact that, in case you're taking observe, a great number of what a number of those 'new veraion' men say contradicted 'Jesus'. that's with the aid of fact they - 'Paul' as an occasion - have been 'correctors' ordained via the Roman crown to 'appropriate' the words of Jesus, and different socalled 'heretics'. The Assin (Essen) sect have been those to whom Jesus belonged and the early Christian Church became completely 'anti-essen' and anti-Jesus. They hated those humble human beings and grew to become them into fugitives. in an prolonged time they claimed the authority of a divine faith upon the attractiveness of the comparable 'Jesus' who they have now metaphorically buried under the Vatican and the Roman bypass. From earlier cases, those Assin - even in Samson as occasion - did no longer decrease their hairs yet allowed it to strengthen in locks. that's an exceedingly historical African custom that some sects today nonetheless persist with. Rastafarians as an occasion. They, like the Essen, do no longer accept as true with killing animals to consume. They consume in basic terms vegetables and end result. Jesus campaigned against anaimal sacrifice and killing to consume. This became between the main suitable truths approximately him that keeps to be hidden. with the aid of fact Palestine on the time became being colonised, the Roman traditions have been compelled upon the folk as greater suitable. the comparable subject got here approximately in Jamaica the place the colonial capability of england left her impression. Rastafarians have been despised, crushed, stoned to dying, marginalised, all with the aid of fact their hair became a 'shame' to the prestige quo. They weren't even allowed in Church. It became no longer in basic terms 'Jesus' hair that became a shame to Paul. people who've eyes will see...

2016-10-03 08:00:08 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Good question. Since artists have painted Jesus that way, it has confused alot of people. Unfortunately most people never read enough of the Bible for themselves to catch the discrepency!!

2006-11-05 16:17:50 · answer #8 · answered by Sparkle1 6 · 0 0

Jesus was a Nazarene and no razor is to be near their hair.

2006-11-05 14:57:26 · answer #9 · answered by jeni 7 · 0 0

Hypocrisy

2006-11-05 14:14:47 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3 2

fedest.com, questions and answers