Are we commanded to cut our hair or not?

[Floatingaxe]

Sooooooooooo by keeping this going and pointing out what "you" think about what Shiloh said, and telling him how he is wrong, what exactly are you doing differently, since your doing the same thing, you are accusing him of doing.

Talking about the speck in your brothers eye and a plank in your own is right.

Shiloh for President in "08"

Right. Shiloh has not called anyone a name, nor has he been rude. I know who the rude ones are...and the namecallers! I got their names on a list!

[Guest shiloh357]

Shalom Shiloh,

Yes, I understand that, but you see, your statement here is what I responded to and it doesn't line up with what you're saying now.

quoteThe problem here, is that those who believe that Paul is setting the bar for men's hair length are not "discussing" it. They are the ones who claim that any other view is wrong.

Yes, so I am not seeing your point. The fact is I was told I was outright wrong. I simply responded with why I believe that I am right and my opponents are wrong. Evidently, you don't think these things can cut both ways.

Shiloh, if you give yourself the right to speak your mind, then others have that right as well. The "truth" is that we are all entitled to our posts and what we believe.

Oh my gosh... Can you PLEASE copy and paste where I ever said that anyone who disagrees with me does not have the right to post their views? Please? Just post ONE remark from me to that effect. I defy you to do it.

I won't go round and round with you because you've got your mind pretty made up, but I just wanted to weigh in here since you are taking the time to point out the speck in thy brother's eye and seemingly missing thy own log.

Not hardly. You are bit mixed up, that is all I can say.

quote Paul was discussing a much larger issue. Some people want to ignore the REAL issue because if they were ever honest about what Paul was actually addressing, it would kick the legs out from under their petty, legalistic rules. quote

That's your opinion and you're entitled to it.

I personally don't see anyone who has posted anything petty or legalistic, but if you wish to see it that way, have at it! The REAL issue as I see it that some people want to be able to hold convictions while telling others theirs are wrong. Sorry, that's not Scriptural. Since this has nothing to do with salvation or sin, it is a matter of personal conviction and as such, should be discussed with respect and grace for each other's position, whcich you are refusing to do.

Yeah, imposing hairstyles on people is legalistic. Legalism is wrong. Legalism is unbiblical and flies in the face of Scripture and it is not a lack of grace to point that out.

And I will ask you what makes your position any more valid or correct than Butero's? Your position is the same as anyone else's, your position. And if you have the right to call someone's Scriptural convictions "carnal, unbiblical, immature, pretty, legalistic blah blah blah, then you exalt yourself and your postion not the Bible's, that is what I am trying to point out. The discussion left hair length some time ago and it became one of flesh and pride.

My position is more correct because my position is based on viewing the Scriptures in the light of the object and subject matter Paul had in mind. My position is not merely an opinion, but has evidentiary value. My position is more correct, because it takes into account the historical/cultural issues that are in play, and views the passage in the light of the actually issues and challenges that the first Christians in Corinth faced as they struggled to understand what their posture should be toward their former lifestyle.

My position is more correct, because it lines up hermeneutically through sound principles of literary analysis. It is not something that I hold to out of pride, but because my view lines up with what historians know about the culture of ancient Greece. My position, utlimately, upholds the reliability of Scripture and shows that the Bible is in complete agreement with what secular historians know about ancient Corinth. In effect, to deny the cultural issues raised in 1 Corinthians as Butero and others do, is to subtract valuable evidence that we can use to show the historical reliability of the Bible in the face of secular skepticism.

And this is not a grace-filled statement. THAT was my point Shiloh. You are focusing more on the fact that people have different opinions and interpretations than discussing this with grace.

Discussing with "grace" does not mean being nice at the expense of being honest. I am not focusing on differing opinions. I am focusing on the imposition of those opinions on others. I am focusing on the way these opinions are turned into man made rules where people have to look a certain way in order to not have their spirituality seen as suspect. That is why I am principally opposed to the view that a person is shameful as a Christian if he sports long hair. I don't care if someone thinks that they should keep their hair short. That is neither here nor there with me. However, when someone starts saying, "The Bible says a man must have short hair," I am going to tell them it is wrong interpretation of the passage.

So far, not one person has stepped to refute the evidence I presented, all they have done is become offended that I presented it at all, and I have had false positions and false arguments attributed to me, and every attempt to clarify and reclarify my position only meets with more of the same.

Yes, you have repeatedly called people's convictions "carnal, unbiblical, immature, blah, blah, blah. As if you have the right to do so. Sorry Shiloh, while I repect your opinion and your convictions, I must say this discussion is not about YOU or what you resent, or what you won't allow. I believe we must answer to G-d and sometimes people want to step in and be the Holy Spirit.

This is what I'm trying to point out.

If they have the right to misattribute false statements to me, I have the right to reject their position and state why. I have not done anything wrong. I have not returned their unkindness in kind. I have the right to say what I see as right and what I see as wrong. I will excersize that right, like it or not. If that bothers you, then you don't have to remain in this thread a moment longer.

Yes, and that applies to both sides of any discussion. What we see lacking here is one Believer refusing grace to another. And that is why I am speaking up. I am drawing a line in sand and pointing out the truth that this discussion has gotten to be more about you than the Scriptures, which is wrong.

Go back and read through the thread. I was the one trying to keep the focus on the Scriptures it was my opponents who decided to accuse me of chopping up the Bible, and throwing out the Scriptures. They were the one who put the focus on me. My responses have been to correct their perceptions about me. I am not trying to make it about me, but my opponents have left me no other choice but to respond as I have responded.

Brother, just so you know, I never said I had a problem at all. I am simply pointing out the truth, same as you. I personally don't care either way that you have such an issue with this because I have brought this before the L-rd and I know what I believe. So, it's not a matter of me not liking anything. I am simply exerting my rights, as yoiu are, to comment and observe on the deeper issues of this discussion. You may not like it Shiloh, but that doesn't make it wrong.

You see??? Right there. I have never denied your rights to respond to me at all. I have responded to you as to why I don't think you really know what is going on in this thread. I don't believe you have read it in its entirety and probably won't. If you have, I don't think you are being completely honest about what I have come up against in this thread. I have been far more charitable than some others would have been. I know what I believe and why, and I stick to it.

And, so I leave you now to your resentment and you not allowing this and that and you calling people's convictions carnal. You answer to G-d the same as every one of us here does. I just wanted to point out some things that perhaps you could not see.

Can you please just lose the drama?? I don't resent anyone's convictions. I resent them imposing their convictions on other people, and implying that something is wrong with their walk with the Lord if their hair is too long, or something. It is a carnal interpretation; it is based on purely human reasoning, and nothing else. It is also carnal when they impose it on others as biblical when it is nothing but a man made rule.

[Guest man]

You people should really let it go.

The original question has been answered....many times.

[Guest LadyC]

Shiloh for President in "08"

can i be your campaign manager?

[eric]

You people should really let it go.

The original question has been answered....many times.

It has too, many times, but as I mentioned in another thread, some people like to dig their toes in, just for the sake of hearing themselves speak. Their exsgesis is out of kilter and the knowledge of hermeneutics is poor. Some believe everything that their pastors tell them, without researching the subject for themselves.

Sorry, but I have to go with Shiloh357.

[Vickilynn]

Sooooooooooo by keeping this going and pointing out what "you" think about what Shiloh said, and telling him how he is wrong, what exactly are you doing differently, since your doing the same thing, you are accusing him of doing.

Shalom SP,

No, sorry, that won't fly. I'm not the one saying anyone's views are "Immature, unbiblical, carnal, blah blah blah.

I'm not the one insisting my view is the only right one, so your accusation is simply not true, but I understand it as you think I am coming against Shiloh personally, but I am not. I am simply posting the truth as I see it as it relates to this discussion. No emotion, no "drama", simple truth.

And if Shiloh has the right to post whatever he wishes, then I should as well. If you're going to accuse me, you must accuse him as well. Otherwise, it is not truth. And that's what we're talking about here, the truth of Scriptures.

Anyway, it really doesn't matter who agrees with whom, who pats each other on the back and who wants whom for president (like that really relates to the discussion!)

What matters is what the Scriptures say.

As far as "letting it go", that statement is not applicable since no one is being forced to reply. This board is all about discussions. People enjoy discussing, that's why we're here. If people wish to "let it go", they will move on and post elsewhere. As long as there is interest in the discussion, people will discuss. Sorry, but no one can tell another to stop posting, they can simply stop posting anytime they wish.

Personally, I find this topic interesting and I see nothing wrong with discussing it. So, as long as there are posts I can respond to, I will.

My suggestion for anyone that wishes to "let it go" is to simply stop posting.

[Vickilynn]

Shalom,

I found this article online and found their arguments interesting to say the least. While I don't agree with the conclusions, I do believe there are some things to think about contained in the article.

http://www.solidrockfaith.com/long_haired.html

Long-Haired Men??

"Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?" (1. Corinthians 11:14)

Many people take issue with the teaching of this passage of Scripture. Some say it is a shame, but not a sin. This is a false dichotomy, for shame is the emotion of sin and is its natural result. It follows, therefore, that the reason it is a shame for a man to have long hair is because it is a sin. We ask, a shame unto whom? Is it a shame unto "him" - the man himselff who is wearing the unbiblical hairstyle, or is it a shame unto "Him" - God, who made man in His image? Certainly both are true. The Lord is dishonored any time His Word is disobeyed.

The word shame is translated from the Greek word atimia, which is translated "dishonor," "reproach," or "vile" in other places. In 1. Corinthians 15:43, it is used to describe a dead and putrefying, decaying body. In Romans 1:26, atimia is translated "vile. Thus to wear the hair in locks, braids, or ponytails is an offense to manhood and is a token of effeminacy (1. Corinthians 6:9). Revelation 9:7,8, portrays the locusts having men's faces, with hair as women, as demonic. It is no wonder that sodomy and other forms of immorality are rampant in our society.

For a believer to wear long hair is to commit the sin of worldliness (James 4:4, 1. John 2:15). He thus becomes a stumbling block to his fellow believers and an offense unto God.

Many try to justify their long hair by stating that Jesus Christ wore long hair. To set the record straight, there is not a shred of Biblical or historical evidence that Jesus wore His hair long. All such statues or pictures are the products of people who never saw Him and who lived hundreds of years later.

Jesus was not a Nazarite! According to Numbers 6:5,7, a Nazarite did wear long hair. However, Christ was a Nazarene and not a Nazarite! Although the two words look similar in English, they are entirely different in looks and meaning in the original language of the Bible. A Nazarene lived in Nazareth (Matthew 2:23). A Nazarite was one who took or was placed under the Nazarite vow. The most notable Nazarites, whose vow was for life, were Samson, Samuel, and John the Baptist.

A Nazarite could not use any product of the vine. Thus, Jesus could not have instituted Communion if He had been a Nazarite, for in it He drank of the fruit of the vine. Nor could He have touched the funeral coffin of the dead man in Luke 7:11-18. If He had been a Nazarite, Judas would not have needed to identify Him in Gethsemane, for Jesus would have been the only long-haired man there.

The Bible speaks of Absalom, who was not a Nazarite yet had long hair. This man is to be noted for his vanity, arrogance, rebellion, and self-will - characteristics of the hippie movement of the 1960s and early 1970s. This young man came to an inglorious, shameful, and untimely end. Long hair does speak. Even today it is frequently used to signify drugs, rock music, and civil disobedience, whereas short hair speaks of authority and discipline.

In Ezekiel 44:20, God commanded the Levites, "Neither shall they shave their heads, nor suffer their locks to grow long; they shall only poll (to cut off or cut short the hair of) their heads." It is interesting how they interpreted this and carried it out. The Talmud required Jewish priests to cut their hair every thirty days. It specified what became known as the "Julian" or "Caesar" cut, as required for Jewish priests or rabbis.

"If any man seem to be contentious [carnal, rebellious, stubborn, or argumentative], we have no such custom [of long-haired men and bobbed-haired women], neither the churches of God" (1. Corinthians 11:16). Some professing Christians today look for loopholes in the Scriptures. If the Holy Spirit is truly abiding in our hearts, brethren, these things ought not so to be.

Do you like the truth? Paul said, "The time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables" (2. Timothy 4:3,4). Repent, forsake your sins, and keep the commandments of God, or you will suffer the eternal consequences.

No believing parent should permit his teenage son to have long hair if the son stays under his father's roof. The unisex trend is a device of Satan to break down and blur the mark of distinction that God instituted between the sexes. Satan means to make women ape men , and men ape women.

Those who ask the question, "How long is long?" often manifest a compromising attitude toward obeying the plain command of the Lord. Why split hairs about something God has commanded? He has drawn the line, and let us not try to erase it. Preachers who compromise on this subject, hoping to reach more young people, fight against God Almighty.

If you are a new believer in Jesus Christ, you are no longer uninformed or misinformed. As a man, patronize your local barber regularly, keep a good, decent haircut, and please your heavenly Father in this area. Don't worry about how different you might look to others! Clip off the locks that hang below your hairline. Never allow your hair to become shabby, shaggy, or bushy. If we are faithful in these little things, then the Lord says He will entrust us with greater things (Luke 16:10; 19:17). You will surely find favor with both God and men.

This is the love of God, that we keep his commandments; and his commandments are not grievous. 1. John 5:3.

Edited April 8, 2007 by Vickilynn

[Floatingaxe]

I'll betcha John the Baptist had wild long hair, having lived in the wilderness for years, and he was far from carnal...he was filled with the Holy Spirit!

[OopsMartin]

I'll betcha John the Baptist had wild long hair, having lived in the wilderness for years, and he was far from carnal...he was filled with the Holy Spirit!

Shameful, shameful. Really, I'm sure he was a shame to someone, just not to God. And in his case, it just didn't matter as long as he was doing the work that God sent him to do.

[Floatingaxe]

I'll betcha John the Baptist had wild long hair, having lived in the wilderness for years, and he was far from carnal...he was filled with the Holy Spirit!

Shameful, shameful. Really, I'm sure he was a shame to someone, just not to God. And in his case, it just didn't matter as long as he was doing the work that God sent him to do.