More about Hair.

To have long hair (Gr komaō) means to wear long hair like that of a woman.

Yup, this has been discussed before. Komao referrs to wearing hair in tresses, thus adorning your hair as though it were a women's hairstyle. It DOES NOT refer to simply having long hair in general. It is not unbiblical for men to have long hair, but is it unbiblical for a man to wear his hair to present the appearance that he was a woman. I feel the same is implied towards a womam: short hair is not a sin, but wearing your hair in an attempt to look like a man is a sin.

 

I agree John! At the risk of beating yet another dead horse. My hair is short, but it covers my head...therefore, I am following scripture.

As you can tell from my picture...I do not look like a man.


Sue

 

Ok, I'll bring this up once again.

1 Corinthians 11:6 says "For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered."

Verse 14 says "Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?"

My question: Is "shame" synonomous with "sin"?
People are arguing whether or not long hair on a man is a "sin", but the Bible says it's a "shame".
Would Paul not have said "sin" if he meant it?

 

Excellent point, no it is not.

Yes, but Paul was the one who was teaching us the freedom we have in Christ, I am sure the words he chose were reflecting just that freedom. Culturally it was shameful not to wear a covering, but because of our freedom in Christ, it was not a sin. Paul was not doing what he reprimanded others for doing, he was not burdening us again with the yoke of another law.

~Lorelei

 

Hair is very, very overrated.


mozier

 

It was a pretty good play in its time.

 

Once again we get into the question of what constitutes long hair on men and short hair on women. The Bible is not specific on this, so I don't see how anyone is changing it to meet their fleshly desires.
The doctrines and traditions of men enter the picture when they start determining what is "sin" and what isn't based on their interpretation of the Bible.

 

Men take the Bible and twist it to mean exactly what they want it to mean.
Did not Jesus warn of people teaching the doctrines of men (Mat. 15:9, Mark 7:7)?

Some people read in 1 Corinthians that it is a shame for a man to have long hair, then they start preaching that it's a SIN! That's teaching the doctrines of men.

Why are you getting your nose so out of joint about that? Did I hit a nerve?

 

Show me where it says that it's a sin.

If I go without bathing for a few days, it's a shame, but would it be a sin, too?

 

I don't know what gets folks all sturred up about their hair anyway---nobody ever stops to notice the context to which the Apostle Paul was writing. He was there at Corinth and lots of those folks were getting saved, born again! A church was formed and those saved folks were being baptized---young little baby Christians---coming out from under the ungodly, damnable bondage of the goddess, Diane.

The ladies who were getting SAVED still wanted a SHAVE!!!! Before they were saved--they'd shave their heads as part of the worship of that ungodly Diana! And now that they were saved---some of the spiritual babies still wanted to hang on to that rule that was given by worship of Diana among other gods and goddesses.

Probably on Saturday nite when most women were "rollin' and sprayin' their hair getting ready for church the next day---the spiritual babes were instead--shavin'--and the Apostle Paul writes to tell them---"Ladies! Lay the razor down! You don't need to do that anymore! The Lord Jesus has done died to save you from that law!!"

That's the point I see it from! Any good Southern Baptist commentary will tell you what I just said! The woman's glory was her hair---Paul says---"Ladies! Let the men see your glory! Let the men see who and why they honor!"

Blackbird

 

We have soldiers in Iraq who haven't bathed in a month. It's neither a shame nor a sin.

 

Just looking at Biblical text alone I see this: 1 Corinthians 1:2, "Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in CHrist Jesus, called to be saints, WITH ALL THAT IN EVERY PLACE call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours."

While I recognize that the culture at Corinth was heathen, I also recognize that the culture in America is also heathen.

But, the entire book was written to the Corinthians and ALL IN EVERY PLACE WHO CALL UPON JESUS CHRIST.

While I agree with Jailminister that we are to literally follow this Scripture, I believe that it calls for an additional covering on top of the long hair for women and no covering on short hair for men.

1 Corinthians 11:6, "For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn; but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered."

This makes it an impossiblity that it just the hair. If it were only the hair it would say, "For if the woman does not have long hair let her cut it off or shave it off." She can't shave off what is not there.

And for those who feel it is a dead horse I don't think that is a good view to have about any Scripture. While we still have freedom let us talk about the Scriptures in public.

And for those ladies who feel it is ok for women to have short hair I beg you to realize where the cut off hair came from. It was from the feminists.

Why not try to appear as different from feminism as possible. Let's not subtley support feminism by following their hairstyles and trends. It is good to be a woman in our place, different from men. It is good to have long hair and be opposed to any indication of feminism as possible.

 

Blackbird,
Is woman the glory of man? Is man the glory of God? Then why would we want to flaunt man's glory before a Holy God?

 

Hi Jailminister,

At the end of last year during one of my church's missionary meetings, this issue popped up. One of the older deaconesses expressed the same opinion: the hair is the woman's covering.

I wonder how many of us would interpret it this way if we did not have the aid of concordances, bible dictionaries, commentaries, and the like?

Perhaps we would take the passage literally and women would cover their heads.

Just a some thought. I learned a lot from you post.

In Christ,
Jamal5000