Ah the "you're a shallow person" proof.I have to agree with you there too. It was specific for that culture.
I am a guy and I have very long hair, and a beard. How long? think 80's Rock star that never decided to change ...
God cares what is in our hearts, and not what is on our heads.
My long is hair is part of who I am. People can choose not to accept it, that is their choice. But it remains.
Just remember, this long haired rock-star looking guy has saved a lot of lives in his career, and brought untold relief to the suffering of many. So before we go making a non-issue about appearances, before we go being all that shallow, let us look to works not to appearances.
I don't think something written by Paul to the Corinthians need apply to us. I have had a lot of people get angry with me because I do not accept Paul on my spiritual pantheon and do not give much creedence to much of his writings. I would say that since I do not believe in Paul much, his writings like the one mentioned regarding long hair do not apply to me. Paul does not inspire me.
I don't give much creedence to Joseph Smith or his command to take multiple wives either. Joseph Smith is not on my list of "people from whom to take spiritual advice ."
I also don't give much concern or thought to the Quran telling me to stone witches. Muhammed, while a great prophet to many, is not MY Prophet. So Muhammed's commands do not apply to me either.
What does apply is Jesus' love and acceptance. I do not for one minute believe that Jesus was so shallow of a person that he would have cared how people looked. He seemed to have unconditional love for Lepers and the deformities caused by Hansen's Disease, and that makes a person physically uglier than even me. I don't think Jesus was that shallow.
I am also a very physically unattractive person. I am friendly, but not a pushover, somewhat introverted, independent, educated, but not good looking. Many people will not talk to me becaue I am the big ugly guy.
Like I care, because if someone does not want to talk to me or sit with me at church or whatever because of my looks, am I missing out on some shallow superficial person that cares only about looks? Seriously?
I don't for one second believe that Jesus would do that either. Paul would, because Paul was all about Paul, and he was shallow and unenlightened. Jesus would not have tooped to Paul's level, and Paul never had the knowledge or inspiration or love to overcome his own EGO and rise to Jesus' level.
The store where I shop has this guy who lost his arms in the war. He has to wear fake hooks and I see people staring at him all the time. Like he could help it, like he is doing something wrong by working and drawing a Paycheck. Everytime I see him, I walk by call him by name, ask him how he is doing, just to let him know that some of us, regardless of our appearance, are really nice people and really care how someone else is doing. We are not judging people by Apprearance like Paul would, we are loving unconditionally like Jesus would. There is a difference.
I'm not sure. I lean in that direction however. As a practical matter, I never pray with my head covered with a hat. I feel guilty if I do.If hair is the covering that Paul is referring to in I Corinthians 11 it would not matter at all what a man has over his hair as long as his hair is not covering his head, would it?
I disagree. I think short hair looks great on women. I really like British tv personality Emma Willis's hairstyle.God wants long hair on women and short hair on men.
1 Corinthians 11:15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.
long hair on men is not only wrong (see icon pic, i.e. it's a man with short hair, aka moi) it may be an abomination before God because it may be that it is "that which pertaineth to a woman".
Deuteronomy 22:5 The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.
2nd point.
Should a woman be kicked out of church for having short hair?
I say yes.
should a man be kicked out of church for having long hair?
I say yes again.
There is no argument that God wants men to have short hair and women long hair, that is clear from scripture.
Short hair is cool, you don't even need a comb. feels like a brush when you rub your hand over it. one thing less to worry about when getting dressed in the morning. ya don't have to look for a comb, put on hair lotion, or even wash it as often. Hum, wonder how I can stop my beard hairs from growing.
well all women are attractive, even with short hair, even with tatoos, even wearing a men's clothes, even with mud all over them , even with horrible lipstick on. Doesn't mean I prefer those things, just that even with all that they are still attractive.. But that's not my reason that I say women should have long hair. I say it's because of what is said in 1 cor. 11.I disagree. I think short hair looks great on women. I really like British tv personality Emma Willis's hairstyle.
It would be rather silly to follow everything that the Bible says. Leviticus 10-11 tells us not to eat shellfish, but how many Christians obey that?well all women are attractive, even with short hair, even with tatoos, even wearing a men's clothes, even with mud all over them , even with horrible lipstick on. Doesn't mean I prefer those things, just that even with all that they are still attractive.. But that's not my reason that I say women should have long hair. I say it's because of what is said in 1 cor. 11.
I don't because of that verse and because it is healthier to eat kosher. Isaiah 66 refers to the millinium and the battle of armegedon and it saysIt would be rather silly to follow everything that the Bible says. Leviticus 10-11 tells us not to eat shellfish, but how many Christians obey that?
Jesus perfects the dietary law, so important in Jewish daily life, by revealing its pedagogical meaning through a divine interpretation: Whatever goes into a man from outside cannot defile him . . . (Thus he declared all foods clean.) What comes out of a man is what defiles a man. For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts. . . ." (CCC 582)I don't because of that verse and because it is healthier to eat kosher. Isaiah 66 refers to the millinium and it says
Isaiah 66:17 They that sanctify themselves, and purify themselves in the gardens behind one tree in the midst, eating swine's flesh, and the abomination, and the mouse, shall be consumed together, saith the LORD.
the LORD is going to consume those who eat pork durring the millinium.
It's quite obvious that everyone knows that 1 cor. 11.;15 means God gave women long hair for a covering. People either find ways to justify not observing that scripture, or they believe it and apply it to their lifes. No one is saying or can say that 1 cor 11.15 means God didn't give long hair to women for a covering.
1 Corinthians 11:15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.
The only choice one faces is go around the verse or accept it.
1 Corinthians 11:15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.This is simply not true.
1. In what way did God 'give' women long hair? Men have been 'given' the same ability to have long hair. All anyone has to do is not cut it. So, no, it's not obvious.
what I think it means is what you think it means it's what everyone thinks it means. everyone knows 1 cor .11.15 says that womens long hair is given her as a covering, and everyone knows ""hair is given her for a covering" means "her hair is given her for a covering". There's no way to dodge the meaning of the verse. All you have continually done is try and state reasons 1 cor. 11.15 should be ignored. Which indicates that you know what it means.seeingeyes said:2. The only choice is to except what you think this verse means or ignore it? Really?
I already answered that you just missed my answer.seeingeyes said:You still haven't even answered the question, "how long is long?" Can you tell me, in inches, how long 'long hair' is? And would Paul have agreed with that determination? Why or why not?
I didn't miss it, and it was just another attempt of yours to give a reason why 1 cor. 11 should be ignored cause you know what it means and you don't like what it means. basically you said in effect, ignore 1cor. 11 cause no one can know what is long and what is short. ridiculous, but that was your implied argument.seeingeye said:You never answered my 'serious' post after my 'joke' post apparently fell flat. Not sure if you missed it.
seeingeyes said:How long is a piece of string?
2ducklow#5 said:In effect what you are saying is that no one can determine if hair is long or short, or perhaps, that what is long to one person is short to another and vice versa. I disagree. Scripture can be obeyed every single last one of them including the hair length sscriptures. For the individual it's ''if you think your hair is long and your conscious is clear, then it is long.
2ducklow#5 said:No one things that hair an inch long is long, and no one things hair that is 12 inches long is short. The dividing line between short and long is a judgement call that every individual church should make. And members of that particular church should abide by the hair length standards set by their church. That is the ideal situation in my estimation. Of course most all churches have no hair length standard, it's anything goes in most all churches, but the standard should be what the bible says, not what churches say.
Or perhaps it should just be preached that long hair is wrong for guys, and good for girls, and leave it up to the consciousness of each individual. From a practical standpoint, that would work as well because people who disobey the hair length standard set by the bible would be convicted in their consciousness and either do the right thing, or they would get mad at the preaching and leave. Plus there would be peer presure to conform to the hair length standard. Either way would work normally.
If you want to throw out the verses pertaining to hair length, well that's another matter. That is the usual option most churches take, They usually say that the hair length verses are just the opinon of the old fuddy duddy Paul, and not God's opinon. But I believe it's the word of God given to us through paul, as would they if the topic wasn't hair length.
Here is my response I posted way back on the first page of this thread.
Or perhaps it should just be preached that long hair is wrong for guys, and good for girls, and leave it up to the consciousness of each individual. From a practical standpoint, that would work as well because people who disobey the hair length standard set by the bible would be convicted in their consciousness and either do the right thing, or they would get mad at the preaching and leave. Plus there would be peer presure to conform to the hair length standard. Either way would work normally.
All those who refuse to believe 1 cor. 11 is the word of God refuse also to say what any of it means. you have repeatedly done this. cause you know what it means and you don't like what it means.
No. Like i said, no one thinks hair 12 inches long is short. and no one thinks hair that is one inch long is long. hair to the middle of anyone's back is going to be considered long by everyone.Thank you for reposting. I did indeed miss your reply.
So wait. When I said that women should have waist length hair, and men should have it to the middle of their back, that would be an acceptable standard, yes?
when you say it is a custom and need not be obeyed, you are denying that it is God's will that it be obeyed. What's the difference in saying 'don't obey the word of God in 1 cor. 11" and "1 cor.11 isn't the word of God"? Not much cause both have the same result. namely long hair wasn't given as a covering for women, as god said it was.. God said long hair was given to women as a covering (1 cor. 11.15) you say no it wasn't that was just a custom, ignore it.seeingeye said:If someone claims that 1 Cor 11 meant something specific to the Corinthians, that is not the same thing as refusing to believe God's word.
when you say it is a custom and need not be obeyed, you are denying that it is God's will that it be obeyed. What's the difference in saying 'don't obey the word of God in 1 cor. 11" and "1 cor.11 isn't the word of God"? Not much cause both have the same result. namely long hair wasn't given as a covering for women, as god said it was.. God said long hair was given to women as a covering (1 cor. 11.15) you say no it wasn't that was just a custom, ignore it.
! cor 11.15 says long hair was given to women as a covering, you won't say one way or the other what it means to you. I'm not afraid to say what it means, It means what it says as I have repeatedly pointed out. and you have repeatedly refused to say what it means, cause you know what it means and don't want to admit it., that's ignoreing it.But what if it was in response to local customs? Even people who believe this don't 'ignore' it.
I apply 1 cor. 11 to everyone, you apply it to no one living to day. so I don't know what you mean by this.seeingeyes said:They just apply it more generally than you do.
! cor 11.15 says long hair was given to women as a covering, you won't say one way or the other what it means to you. I'm not afraid to say what it means, It means what it says as I have repeatedly pointed out. and you have repeatedly refused to say what it means, cause you know what it means and don't want to admit it., that's ignoreing it.
I apply 1 cor. 11 to everyone, you apply it to no one living to day. so I don't know what you mean by this.
God gave women long hair. it's hormonal. that's why guys go bald and women seldom do. God gave it to women also in that it is a natural beauty compliment to a woman. It looks horrible on a man, except to those who have been twisted away from what is natural on this subject. "Doth not nature itself teach you....."But in what way was long hair 'given' to women? You are acting like it is obvious, but it isn't. Haven't men been 'given' long hair, too? If they don't interfere with some scissors, that's exactly what they will have.
and I see it as saying that if you reject all the reasons that Paul has given for why men should not have long hair and women should , then you should accept it because the church has no other tradition than that.seeingeyes said:"Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering. If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practicenor do the churches of God. "
Paul was settling an existing argument, not creating a brand new law. The primary problem was the contentiousness of the Corinthian church, who instead of living 'at peace with one another' as the Lord commanded them, they were bickering about stupid things like hair length.
all things are not permissible. it is not permissible to bear false witness, it is not permissible to steal, it is not permissible to do a lot of things. "Everything" in 1 cor.10 is a hyperbole. which means it's an overstatement used for emphasis. Like saying "he's strong as an ox." well he isn't strong as an ox, it's just hyperbole emphasising how strong he is. 1 cor. 10 doesn't cancel out 1 cor. 11.15. God said through paul that long hair was given to women as a covering.seeingeye said:Just before this Paul said: Everything is permissiblebut not everything is beneficial. Everything is permissiblebut not everything is constructive. Nobody should seek his own good, but the good of others." (1 Cor 10)
So did Paul forget that He had said this just a couple of paragraphs before? Or was he claiming that hair length was, in fact, the issue of importance. More important than eating the meat sacrificed to idols? More important than circumcision?
God wants long hair on women and short hair on men.
1 Corinthians 11:15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.
long hair on men is not only wrong (see icon pic, i.e. it's a man with short hair, aka moi) it may be an abomination before God because it may be that it is "that which pertaineth to a woman".
Deuteronomy 22:5 The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.
2nd point.
Should a woman be kicked out of church for having short hair?
I say yes.
should a man be kicked out of church for having long hair?
I say yes again.
There is no argument that God wants men to have short hair and women long hair, that is clear from scripture.
Short hair is cool, you don't even need a comb. feels like a brush when you rub your hand over it. one thing less to worry about when getting dressed in the morning. ya don't have to look for a comb, put on hair lotion, or even wash it as often. Hum, wonder how I can stop my beard hairs from growing.
God gave women long hair. it's hormonal. that's why guys go bald and women seldom do. God gave it to women also in that it is a natural beauty compliment to a woman. It looks horrible on a man, except to those who have been twisted away from what is natural on this subject. "Doth not nature itself teach you....."
Androgenetic alopecia [hereditary balding] is an extremely common disorder that affects roughly 50% of men and perhaps as many women older than 40 years. As many as 13% of premenopausal women reportedly have some evidence of androgenetic alopecia. However, the incidence of androgenetic alopecia increases greatly in women following menopause, and, according to one author, it may affect 75% of women older than 65 years.
- Robert P Feinstein Medscape: Medscape Access
yes it does, except to those who reject the teaching of nature and go another route, then what is abonormal seems normal. that is the case with long hair on men and short hair on women.
and I see it as saying that if you reject all the reasons that Paul has given for why men should not have long hair and women should , then you should accept it because the church has no other tradition than that.
all things are not permissible. it is not permissible to bear false witness, it is not permissible to steal, it is not permissible to do a lot of things. "Everything" in 1 cor.10 is a hyperbole. which means it's an overstatement used for emphasis. Like saying "he's strong as an ox." well he isn't strong as an ox, it's just hyperbole emphasising how strong he is. 1 cor. 10 doesn't cancel out 1 cor. 11.15. God said through paul that long hair was given to women as a covering.
do you believe god gave women long hair as a covering or not? you're implying that since it's not clear how long hair was given to women, it wasn't. It doesn't matter how it was given to women the fact is 1 cor. 11.15 says it was given to women as a covering. God gave it, and modern women whack off what God gave them.
I said I do not. didn't you read my 'hyperbole' explanation?Men are hardly the only ones to go bald. Woman just have more social pressure to cover it up. Perhaps because they believe that it is 'shameful' for a woman to be bald, even if baldness is what God gave her.
The teaching of nature? I've never in my life seen a natural buzz cut. Every man has to go 'against nature' with a razor in order to keep his hair short.
Women do not 'naturally' have longer hair than men. They simply don't.
Well we have a new tradition now, don't we?
Do you believe that "everything is permissible' or not?
it means that it is permissible to eat meat sacrificed to idols, but it is beneficial to not eat meat sacrificed to animals if it offends your brother. Neither eating nor refraining from eating meat sacrificed to idols is a sin, is the meaning of "everything is permissible".seeingeye said:God said through Paul that everything is permissible but not everything is beneficial. You know what it means but you don't like what it means. Why ignore the word of God?
