Long hair on a man

[FFC]

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?

I used to be an Independent fundamentalist and I was told that I had to cut my hair short because it was a sin. What does this verse mean? Any ideas?

[Byblos]

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?

I used to be an Independent fundamentalist and I was told that I had to cut my hair short because it was a sin. What does this verse mean? Any ideas?

Didn't Jesus and several of his disciples have long hair? (or is that due to Hollywood's artistic license?).

[bizzt]

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?

I used to be an Independent fundamentalist and I was told that I had to cut my hair short because it was a sin. What does this verse mean? Any ideas?

Didn't Jesus and several of his disciples have long hair? (or is that due to Hollywood's artistic license?).

Strange... Where do people get these Pictures from?

[FFC]

FFC wrote:
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?

I used to be an Independent fundamentalist and I was told that I had to cut my hair short because it was a sin. What does this verse mean? Any ideas?

Byblos wrote:
Didn't Jesus and several of his disciples have long hair? (or is that due to Hollywood's artistic license?).

I'm not sure but all the pictures of Christ and the disciples seem to picture them with long hair. Didn't Samson had long hair as a part of the Nazarene vow? Did God not care that he was a disgrace?

[August]

Having long or short hair has nothing to do with one's salvation.

Paul was most likely here referring to cultural habits of the day. There is no explanation there or anywhere else in the Bible why certain headcoverings may or may not dishonor Christ.

[led]

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?

I used to be an Independent fundamentalist and I was told that I had to cut my hair short because it was a sin. What does this verse mean? Any ideas?

Didn't Jesus and several of his disciples have long hair? (or is that due to Hollywood's artistic license?).

Leave it to Hollywood to twist everything under the sun.
That's a good scripture, Byblos. I wonder how much scripture we can write off as culture and not valid for today. Couldn't we say that the whole book of Philemon is a write off due to culture?

[Jac3510]

An excerpt from the Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament: 1 Corinthians, by David Garland (Baker: 2003), pp 530-31:

• That [Paul] specifically mentions hair in these verses does not mean that hair has been the topic throughout this section (contra Blomberg 1994: 213-14). It is brought up only as a final illustration as to why women should have a cover but men should not.
  
  When Paul speaks of "nature" . . . he means what his society understands to be natural. Sicne male hair grows the same way as female hair does, he must be referring to hair that conforms to societel expectations concerning male and female hairdos. In general, it was dishonorable for men in this culture to have long hair . . . He may be referring to an overly elaborate coiffure, since Roman men normally kept their hair short (see Horace, Ep. 11.28; Juvenal, Sat. 2.96; Petronius, Satyr. 119). In a diatribe against a young student associated with Corinith "whose hair was somewhat too elaborately dressed," Epictetus (Diatr. 3.1.1-45) asks, "Are you a man or a woman?" and brands his hairstyle a complaint against nature. Philo rails against "the disease of effemination" among men who debase "the sterling coin of nature" and are distinguished by braiding and adorning themselves with feminine hairstyles (Spec. Laws 3.7 . . .). In Ps.-Phoc. 210-12, we find this warning:
  
  • If a child is a boy, do not let locks grow on [his] head. Do not braid [his] crown nor cross knots at the top of his head. Long hair is not fit for boys, but for voluptuous women.
  Winter (2001: 132) points out that the only surviving statues in Corinth portraying men wearing long hair, besides male deities, are those appearing in teh Facade of the Captives in the forum in Roman Cointh. Their long hair is intended to send the message that these captives were weak, soft, and effeminate. Long hair for men is unnatural for Paul because in his cultural context it conveys sexual ambiguity and hits of moral perversion.

Pretty much everyone has the same take on this. I thought this would be especially useful due to the historical references. Regardless, it doesn't say to us today that men ought not wear long hair.

God bless

[FFC]

An excerpt from the Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament: 1 Corinthians, by David Garland (Baker: 2003), pp 530-31:

That [Paul] specifically mentions hair in these verses does not mean that hair has been the topic throughout this section (contra Blomberg 1994: 213-14). It is brought up only as a final illustration as to why women should have a cover but men should not.

When Paul speaks of "nature" . . . he means what his society understands to be natural. Sicne male hair grows the same way as female hair does, he must be referring to hair that conforms to societel expectations concerning male and female hairdos. In general, it was dishonorable for men in this culture to have long hair . . . He may be referring to an overly elaborate coiffure, since Roman men normally kept their hair short (see Horace, Ep. 11.28; Juvenal, Sat. 2.96; Petronius, Satyr. 119). In a diatribe against a young student associated with Corinith "whose hair was somewhat too elaborately dressed," Epictetus (Diatr. 3.1.1-45) asks, "Are you a man or a woman?" and brands his hairstyle a complaint against nature. Philo rails against "the disease of effemination" among men who debase "the sterling coin of nature" and are distinguished by braiding and adorning themselves with feminine hairstyles (Spec. Laws 3.7 . . .). In Ps.-Phoc. 210-12, we find this warning:


If a child is a boy, do not let locks grow on [his] head. Do not braid [his] crown nor cross knots at the top of his head. Long hair is not fit for boys, but for voluptuous women.

Winter (2001: 132) points out that the only surviving statues in Corinth portraying men wearing long hair, besides male deities, are those appearing in teh Facade of the Captives in the forum in Roman Cointh. Their long hair is intended to send the message that these captives were weak, soft, and effeminate. Long hair for men is unnatural for Paul because in his cultural context it conveys sexual ambiguity and hits of moral perversion.
Pretty much everyone has the same take on this. I thought this would be especially useful due to the historical references. Regardless, it doesn't say to us today that men ought not wear long hair.

God bless

Thank you, Jac for a well thought out and informative post as usual.

[jenna]

One thing you could also look at would be 1 Corinthians 11:4-15. Please note: many people take this to mean that no man should wear a hat in church, but the word "cover" here actually means "hair". This is explained in verse 15. "for her hair is given to her as a COVERING". Since men werent to cover their head, that means no long hair. And actually, despite all pictures, where in the bible does it actually say Christ had long hair? (this is a personal question I would really like an answer to)

[zoegirl]

"Gimme a head with hair, long beautiful hair..."

Just had to throw that in.

I believe (what little I remember from my history class) that the Roman military really brought in the short hair because it was safer during battle. Could be wrong....

So from a societal perspective it was probably more common in Paul's time for men to have shorter hair. (remember when the Brutus style was in a few years ago? George Clooney, anyone?)

As to Jesus...?

[jenna]

"Gimme a head with hair, long beautiful hair..."

Just had to throw that in.

I believe (what little I remember from my history class) that the Roman military really brought in the short hair because it was safer during battle. Could be wrong....

So from a societal perspective it was probably more common in Paul's time for men to have shorter hair. (remember when the Brutus style was in a few years ago? George Clooney, anyone?)

As to Jesus...?

Yes, as to Jesus? And I want long beautiful hair too...

[zoegirl]

I just simply meant that who knows?

[jenna]

I just simply meant that who knows?

Right, who knows? So why are all pictures of Him showing long hair? Don't really understand this...

[zoegirl]

I think a lot has to do with Rennaisance paintings and tradition....

[jenna]

I think a lot has to do with Rennaisance paintings and tradition....

Ack, save me! more tradition! Zoe, I love you!