Is long hair on man shameful?

[NightEternal]

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

If there was ever a verse in the Bible that caused me much grief and pain with my parents and church as a young man, it is this one.

I'm pretty sure it is taken out of context here and there must be some cultural aspect that is being overlooked. We would do well to properly exegete this passage in order to spare any more unnecessary turmoil and conflict between male Christian youth and those legalistic adults who would deem 'hippies' in the church as rebellious, effeminate, sinning against God and bringing shame to the cause of Christ. Maybe times have changed a great deal since the 80's, I don't know. I think appearance is always going to be an issue for the conservative folk in the church though.

Needless to say, having this passage used as a tool of condemnation against me as a young man was not fun in the least. And it was used against me plenty, believe me.

 

[sentipente]

I thought this thread was about our moderator. My mistake.

 

[sentipente]

Back to the question of inspiration.

 

[NightEternal]

Longhair can share his input if he wishes to!

 

[woobadooba]

I agree that it was a cultural issue.

 

[sentipente]

I agree that it was a cultural issue.

Is that a vote or an opinion?

 

[woobadooba]

Is that a vote or an opinion?

In essence, a vote is an opinion.

The question however, is one of fact.

Is it a fact that Paul was merely stating his own opinion in disclosing this rule, or was/is this a rule that was given to Him by God, to be applied to every generation?

 

[sentipente]

In essence, a vote is an opinion.

It is interesting that you did not say that an opinion is a vote.

 

[woobadooba]

It is interesting that you did not say that an opinion is a vote.

I think it would be best to stick to the topic of the thread. Don't you think so?

 

[sentipente]

I am beginning to wonder how consistent you are in your view of inspiration? When do you decide that Paul is giving his opinion?

 

[longhair75]

I am not sure how shameful it might be, nor how long is shameful. It will soon be a moot point as my long, grey hair is disappearing at an alarming rate.

 

[woobadooba]

I am beginning to wonder how consistent you are in your view of inspiration? When do you decide that Paul is giving his opinion?

It's a matter of using logic and history to put the pieces together, to determine what is an absolute moral as opposed to mere opinion.

For example, how could Paul's view of men having long hair as being shameful, while knowing that Samson's long hair was a symbol of power and glory, be an absolute moral?

An absolute moral is something that applies all the time, irrespective of cultural influence

So if it was right with God for Samson to have long hair, why then would it be wrong with Paul for men to have long hair?

It then appears that Paul was speaking within a cultural context, wherein certain characteristics gave rise to a certain identity, or description of a certain type of person.

For example, we know that during Paul's time there were men who had long hair whose occupation was prostitution. In other words, they were homosexuals. The Greeks were widely known for this kind of practice. Hence Paul's reason for having to address the issue of sexual immorality on several occasions.

You see, these men shamed their gender by taking on the appearance of a woman. Thus they lost their identity as men to sexual immorality and perversion.

Those to whom Paul was addressing were not to give the appearance that they were one with these people. Hence his reason for encouraging them not to have long hair.

Of course, there may be other reasons as well, but judging by the content of Paul's writing and knowing the cultural background of the people that he mostly ministered to (the Greeks), it is quite plausible this this is the main reason why this was an issue with him.

The question that one must ask at this time, however, is where do we draw the line on such matters of identity by association? In other words, what then does it mean to avoid the appearance of evil, and within what context does the rule apply?

 

[sentipente]

It's a matter of using logic and history to put the pieces together, to determine what is an absolute moral as opposed to mere opinion.

Is that a rule of general applicability?

 

[woobadooba]

Is that a rule of general applicability?

I would venture to say yes, since we can't really know what ideas of the past mean without using logic coupled with an understanding of history.

Of course, God could just simply tell us what they mean. But what do you do when God doesn't speak to you audibly on such matters, and what you have doesn't appear to be a moral absolute, but rather something that appears to reflect a certain type of culture? Reason has a role here, does it not?

 

[sentipente]

I would venture to say yes, since we can't really know what ideas of the past mean without using logic that is coupled with an understanding of history.

Are you sure you are traditional?

 

[woobadooba]

Are you sure you are traditional?

I never said I was.

By the way, I edited my post for more clarity.

 

[bellanegra1]

A Nazarite was not to have a razor put to his locks...

A symbol of him being set aside for holy purpose....

Yeshua and the others before following this rite... Had long hair...

What say you of this?

Culture would not, could not be set asite for the traditions nor the missuse of men...

Today, many have thier own reasons for shaving and or not shaving thier heads..

This includes women....

What say yee?

 

[Mankin]

Nice mullet NightEternal Anyway, that verse had to do with the culture of the time.

 

[sentipente]

Apparently, we abandon reason when we want to be unreasonable. Now I know.

 

[moicherie]

And this from a church that probably has pictures of a long haired, blue eyed looking European and labelling it Jesus - so funny.

Paul was inspired to write this under the cultural factors he lived under, the same for the text of womens hair being her covering, women not speaking in church,women being the weaker vessal (yeah right you men try giving birth or having periods) etc
NE way
This reminds me of back in the day a person with locks was expected to cut them off, one presumed he/she was a Rasta now we recognise that having a locks is not the monopoly of Rastafarians and predates that religion. To many its just a hairstyle and many christians including me have locks now. However I understand in the West Indies thay still equate locks with Rastas and can't get over it seeing it on an Adventist head -(smile)