Can someone please help me with a bible discussion?

[Kali]

1 Corinthians 11:14 "Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him,"

Not the relevant discussion of a woman covering her head but the issue of a man not having long hair. What does this mean? How does it relate to nature in the verse? Seems to me nature would say long hair is ok SINCE THAT IS WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU LET NATURE TAKE IT'S COURSE.

Or is this just atypical example of you can pick any issue or position you want and find support for any side somewhere in the bible.

Believe it or not I am having an on-line discussion about long hair on men. Didn't this discussion fade in the 70'S I mean even country singers have long hair now!

[rfranklin]

1. Jesus had hair like a girl!

And he was straight as an arrow! Don't tell me otherwise!

[stopbush]

7. No, he didn't. IF Jesus existed, he would most likely have kept his

hair short.

You've got that Anglicized image of Jesus in your head, the one that American
Xtians all love becuase he looks like a Caucasian rather than a Semite.

Truth be told, Jesus would have looked a lot like Jerry Stiller. :)

[Kali]

17. why do you say that he would have short hair?

[stopbush]

19. Well, you have to believe what Paul said about long hair.

Literally.

here's something interesting:

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/12/25/face.jesus/index.html

[Kali]

18. why do you say that (the hair?)

well, I guess I want to know why you felt the need to state he was straight too?

[Zhade]

32. Is there some reason you're so adamant about Jesus...

...(if he existed) being straight?

Is there some sort of idea in your mind that his being gay would have been a BAD thing?

Patiently awaiting your answer.

[Chemical Bill]

2. Paul wrote that...

and he never met Jesus. Ask the people who cite it if they are "christians" or Paulians".

Bill

[saltpoint]

3. I think it's important to remember that Paul was an asshole.

I don't trust his interpretation of the ministry of Jesus any more than I trust Jim Dobson's.

Shitcan the letters of Paul, at least as reliable interpretations of Jesus' own words. If there was a Jesus, and if the Gospels more or less replicate his words and ministry, use those instead of Paul's letters.

"Jesus was alright," John Lennon said. "But his apostles were thick and ordinary."

[Kali]

14. Heh heh

Paul was an asshole. I like that. Unfortunatly I am pretty ignorant about the bible, so please tell me more, because I would love to post that.

[saltpoint]

31. I'm just not a fan of Paul, and those letters are often obnoxious.

I'd recommend a great book: THE LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST by Nikos Kazantzakis.

Paul's character in that book is close to my thoughts.

[NAO]

28. Paul pretty much INVENTED "Christ Jesus"; you can trust his interpretation

Remember, Paul wrote his letters about the god he called "Christ Jesus" in the 50's and 60's. They Gospels, which had a human being called "Jesus of Nazareth" were not written until after 70, probably long after.

Even when I was a believing Christian in my youth I always liked Paul's "Cosmic Christ" more than I liked the Evangelists "Man from Nazareth".

****

Paul's Heavenly Christ (Colossians 1)

15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

19 For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;

20 And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.

[saltpoint]

29. As long as we're picking Christs, I'll take Matt Fox's over either

the Gospels or Paul.

Fox lays out the details and context in two books especially -- THE COMING OF THE COSMIC CHRIST and ORIGINAL BLESSING.

They're both humdingers. Highly recommended.

[China_cat]

4. Whoever you're discussing this with

is probably reaching back to the OT and using Samson as an example of the only man allowed by god to have long hair? Well, that gets muddied by the 'new covenant' they spout whenever you ask about something else in the OT like not wearing mixed fibers, eating shellfish or trimming your beard.

Two points you could easily make. This is a pronouncement from Paul, not Jesus. #2...if men with long hair is such a problem, why do all depictions of Jesus and men of his time show them with AT LEAST shoulder length hair?

#3...(ok, I'm doing a Douglas Adams) if they are saying that Paul is saying that men's hair doesn't grow long, it's in the same category as the verses that say bats are birds, rabbits chew a cud and grasshoppers have 4 legs. IOW, observably false.

[SutaUvaca]

5. Try the "Big Picture"

I mean, just how tiny is a god who worries about how long your hair is?

[Kali]

15. good point

[nosillies]

6. OK, here's the TMI answer for you.

This is a quote from my study Bible.

"In talking about head coverings and length of hair, Paul is saying that believers should look and behave in ways that are honorable in their own culture. In many cultures long hair on men is considered appropriate and masculine. In Corinth, it was thought to be a sign of male prostitution in the pagan temples. And women with short hair were labeled prostitutes. Paul was saying that in the Corinthian culture, Christian women should keep their hair long. If short hair on women was a sign of prostitution, then a Christian woman with short hair would find it difficult to be a believable witness for Jesus Christ. My comment -- And then likewise for a man with long hair, presumably. Paul wasn't saying we should adopt all the practices of our culture but that we should avoid appearances and behavior that detract from our ultimate goal of being witnesses for Jesus Christ."

So unless the men in question are old-school Corinthian prostitutes, it doesn't matter much, I would assume! :D

edit to add: I believe this was no comment on Jesus at all, as he wasn't a Corinthian.

[Kali]

16. well I would take that to mean men should "conform"

and that the fundie is basically right, men should cut their hair (or whatever version of normal straight society dictates)

So the verse is contextual for a particular city and that is really all that is relevant, nothing to do with Jesus or his hair length at all?

[nosillies]

20. Yeah, I think it's got nothing to do with Jesus

And I don't think it's "conform" so much. I think he was saying look, as a Christian, your goal is to be a good witness for Christ/example of Christian teachings. If you want to do that, then you need to make those you would be witnessing to comfortable. That way, you'll be taken more seriously.

I'll use the prostitute example. Say I wanted to go tell a group pf prostitutes about Jesus. I could approach them in a twin set, pearls, and pencil skirt. But they'd probably be less likely to take my message seriously, as they wouldn't take me seriously. I'd probably dress down! Likewise, if I were talking to a group of local business leaders, I'd probably lose the lucite heels and sequined bra top.

So maybe not conform, but "know your audience."

But hey, that's just my interpretation, and I'm a Bible-lovin' liberal, so I don't take the book too literally!

[TlalocW]

8. There are also passages that say

Don't wear clothing made out of two different fibers. That is, in fact, listed as an abomination to God on the same level as homosexuality (always fun for proving fundies cherry-pick the Bible like everyone else). Which is more dire - dishonor or an abomination to God? I would say abomination, and if the guy you're arguing with is wearing a 60% cotton/40% rayon shirt, he needs to worry more about his getting right with the Lord than some dude with long hair. :)

TlalocW

[SutaUvaca]

9. The Bigger Picture, again

Just in case you're really into this hair vs Bible issue, here's a link with one teacher's thoughts on that verse. Again, lots of fundies use individual verses without either the sourrounding verse or the historical setting for any context at all. They throuw out the big picture from their own Bible, just to make the point at hand.
http://www.mcfarland.co.uk/andrew/blog/2006-02-18

[runningontopof]

10. Corinthians

This section in Corinthians in which you are quoting comes from what is commonly called "Christian Order" or "Propriety in Worship." Back in Corinth during this time period, for a woman, taking off her head covering in public and exposing her hair was a sign of loose morals and sexual promiscuity. A shaved head indicated that the woman had been publically disgraced or was openly flaunting her independence against her husband. A covered head back in this time period meant an actual cloth covering. Nowadays, this is simply seen as women having longer hair to distinguish themselves from men and to show propriety in church. Since women are commanded to be silent in church, this is a way to symbolize that silence whereas men are said to have short hair or being open to speaking in church and to criticism. If a man has long hair, he is not distinguishing himself from a woman and is not

Now, in accordance with men and long hair, scripture says, "a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. This does not mean that men are any better than women but that in all reality, men have to answer directly to God. Women also answer to God but man is in the front first and foremost when a family/couple commits a sinful act. So, men technically should keep their hair short as a sign of humility before God in not trying to cover up anything in their life.

[Igel]

11. The discussion will never fade as long as the original

founding documents of the religion are extant. People can pick them up, read them, take them at face value, and the discussion is on again.

On this score, it's hard to find additional support. In addition to Samson, there was a special group of male dedicatees called Nazerites that were to have long hair. A fair number of exegetes have muddled Nazirite and Nazarene, or decided they were close enough. Part of some folk's justification for the long-haired Jesus.

Many, many things are natural. Many of those are bad. Many are good.

There are men born with a physiological imbalance that greatly disposes them to violence, even murder. They're born that way. Training can mitigate it, but they remain overly aggressive. We're born liking sugar and fat; our evolutionary history dictates "high calorie, good, yummie; leafy plants, low calories, yuck,", and the natural guarantor of a reasonably good was availability. Our 'natures' now make us fat and sclerotic. Hunter gather societies are presumably more 'natural', but have far higher rates of warfare and warfare-related death. So natural isn't necessarily good.

That said, I've never quite understood Paul's reasoning on this. Merely stating that it's said for town-specific reasons and then exclaim "cultural relativism!" doesn't cut it; presumably he'd have been trained well enough to not make an argument based on a town-specific premise and call it "nature".

The 'covering' bit I can follow; seems odd, but I can follow it. Doesn't mean I don't wear a baseball cap from time to time.

[intaglio]

12. There is also Numbers 6:1-5

The LORD said to Moses, "Speak to the Israelites and say to them: If a man or woman wants to make a special vow, a vow of separation to the LORD as a Nazirite, he must abstain from wine and other fermented drink and must not drink vinegar made from wine or from other fermented drink. He must not drink grape juice or eat grapes or raisins.

As long as he is a Nazirite, he must not eat anything that comes from the grapevine, not even the seeds or skins. During the entire period of his vow of separation no razor may be used on his head. He must be holy until the period of his separation to the LORD is over; he must let the hair of his head grow long.

My emphasis.

BTW it may also be that Joshua bar Joseph (Jesus) was a Nazarite rather than a Nazarine

[Kali]

13. Here is the the conversation:

Topic: 16 year old daughter/kids these days/bad influences

fundie: On a light note, that is why I start out when my kids are young pointing out and making fun of those freaks with piercings and multiple tattoos. Got to let them know they are circus freaks not upstanding people. I doubt a freaky teen has ever walked withing sight of me in the last 15 years that I did not point them out and talk to my kids about them. I got my children thinking those types are the boogyman and they will sneak in there rooms and get them at night if they talk to them."


me: I hope I have taught mine to judge people on their actions and accomplishments, not the way they look or dress. All generations of teens dress to fashion and fad. The hair can be cut, the piercings taken out, the clothes changed. Even the tats can be removed or covered ... it's the person underneath that matters.

(then sombody else made a comment re: what gives you the right to judge, and he started spouting biblical justifications for judging others)

me: I could be wrong, but doesn't the bible also say "judge not lest ye be judged"?

fundie: It's not about judging but profiling. Dress like a thug expect to be treated like one, dress like an idiot expect to be treated like one. Personally I'd rather my children never be thought of as either or hang out with either.
If your not a thug or an idiot why in the world would you want to look like one?

me: I have seen plenty of thugs and idiots dressed in business clothes, western clothes, uniforms - work, cop and military, clergy costumes and so forth.
Clothes may form a first impression, true, but the person inside may indeed surprise you. I keep an open mind.
Most popular pictues of Jesus have him looking like a hippie in a dress - or a diaper. Just sayin'.

fundie: How does that change anything that we have said. Once you have remove the obvious misfits form the equation you can focus your attention on weeding out the well dress snakes.

me: What if Jesus is one of the misfits? I mean he was wasn't he?

(more folks chime in on clothes etc)

fundie: Do you really think that Jesus would wear his pants 10 sizes to big, his underwear showing, hat turned sideways, multiple tattoos, and piercings all over the place?

me: I wouldn't dare to presume what the man might wear. That was my point.
Where do you get the idea he would show up dressed however YOU consider is respectable ...here in the US? What if he shows up back in the homeland? What if he shows up in the middle of the African Congo? Antarctica? You really have the inside track? Wow, must be nice to be so certain about folks by the way they dress. Are you the same about skin color?

fundi: What does skin color have to do with anything. You sure do like to take things to the lowest denominator. You don't choose your skin color you do chose what you wear, and what you wear says a lot about you. It doesn't matter where he shows up or what his skin color is I just don't believe he will look like a thug. If you want to think Jesus may possibly be dressed as a thug feel free.
You have your right to your beliefs and I have a right yo mine. Why is it that you feel that every one needs to think like you.
Do you really think that Jesus would wear his pants 10 sizes to big, his underwear showing, hat turned sideways, multiple tattoos, and piercings all over the place?

me: Umm, where did I tell anybody how to think?
I will repeat: I wouldn't presume anything about clothing worn by anybody.
My question about skin color had to do with judging people. I wondered if since you were so positive in your judgement of people who dress differently than you, did that apply to skin color as well.
Glad to hear it doesn't. I have seen some instances of racism on this forum.

another person (to the fundie): You can think anything you like, but the fact of the matter is - you don't know for a fact that anything you've just stated is true. You weren't there.

fundie: Basically I have read and studied the bible, not just the parts of it that fit my philosophy's. God is love, but you can not live only on that, God is also about obedience to be obedient we have to learn what the rules and principals are.
I believe that when Jesus himself spoke at:
1 Corinthians 11:14 "Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him,"
that maybe them pictures of him with long scroungy hair are not accurate.

[nosillies]

21. Ahh, the context is helpful

But first of all, fundie, you should be ashamed! Even us dirty libruls here know that that was Paul talking, not Jesus!

And heck yeah, Jesus would wear his pants low and his hat backward if that's what it took to spread his love. He wouldn't be above anything.

And if Jesus came to visit her crazy fundie self today, she'd never know it. I bet he'd come up to her with the most tattoos or biggest grille or smelliest body odor or nappiest hair. Just to test her. And she'd probably fail!

[Kali]

23. I guess I need another fundamental bit of info, not being particularly

familiar with biblical technicalities. If/when Jesus returns, what is he going to be doing? Would he be still trying to recruit? In that case I would tend to agree with your scenario of playing to the audience, as it were. But what about this rapture stuff? Are they saying when he comes back it's the end of the world, no chance to change your mind at that point? Then why dress in any particular way?

[nosillies]

25. Oh Lord, the rapture, you're scaring me!

:D

There are probably as many different opinions on the Rapture as there are believers! I admittedly don't know what to think about it, but here's my best guess. I think there will be a period where people have the chance to learn more and choose to believe if they will. So there might be a "recruitment" period. I believe in a loving God who likes to give chances! (And if there's any justice, he'll have some fundies shaking in thiier shoes!)

Maybe post that question ion the Christian Liberals/Progressive People of Faith Group. Lot smarter people than me there! And they don't bite.

[Kali]

26. heh

I just want to know what the schedule is and what to wear, ya know? What do they pay those preacher guys for? :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[nosillies]

27. Just make sure you're always wearing clean underwear and you've bathed

You never know how long it will be before you can go home again.

[The Straight Story]

33. It could be argued paul was technically correct in that statement

If the majority of people felt long hair was a dishonor then one could say that nature (mankind being part of it) had found it a bad thing. A social form of evolution which had grown to this point.

Or maybe he was just fucking with us and was referencing how the wooly mammoth went bye bye because it had long hair :)

Sadly, I personally know fundies like the one you describe (I am a christian myself btw). They are really awesome and cool people on the one hand, and crazier than rabid mongoose let loose in my pants at other times.

Jesus, to me, was one of the first hippies.

[achtung_circus]

22. Well

Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him,"

How do lions fit into this equation. Are they unnatural?

[Kali]

24. Hi AC! Yeah I didn't get what the reference to nature was either.

I found a great website for skeptics: http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/index.htm

Pretty biased, but lots of info.

On that PM matter, thanks - Grandin's thoughts are good enough for me! I confess to being lured by the magic bullet of immobilization. I sometimes miss some bulls and they sure do grow fast. Too big for the calf table and then I have to work them in the chute standing. Hard on the hands when they kick. I have tried various ways of trying to tie but nothing is real satisfactory, either takes too long or doesn't work at all. I really need to get a better squeeze. Sigh - maybe next year.

[Evoman]

30. That's a real head scratcher....

I don't have my bible with me...is there some kind of context I'm missing it a previous verse. I don't understand how "nature" can teach you about dishonor.