Length of hair

[Rose2020]

1 Corinthians chapter 11.
Paul speaks of how it is disgraceful for men to have long hair but that for women it is their glory.
That a man must uncover his head to worship but women cover. Paul explains why.

I find this confusing. Samson's strength was in his hair. Popular images and classic paintings invariably show Jesus and his disciples with long hair.

Length of hair has cultural, religious and social implications in many parts of the world. So how important is it?

[Eddie Ramos]

1 Corinthians chapter 11.
Paul speaks of how it is disgraceful for men to have long hair but that for women it is their glory.
That a man must uncover his head to worship but women cover. Paul explains why.

I find this confusing. Samson's strength was in his hair. Popular images and classic paintings invariably show Jesus and his disciples with long hair.

Length of hair has cultural, religious and social implications in many parts of the world. So how important is it?

Hi Rose, me again. You have some very good questions and since I'm new here, I seem to keep checking back quite often. I hope you don't mind if I help.

Basically it all boils down to an incorrect translation which has never been corrected. I'll show you.

1 Corinthians 11:13-15 (KJV)
Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered? 14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? 15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.

But look at the literal translation as written in the Greek:

οὐδὲ----------φύσις----αὐτὴ--διδάσκει-------ὑμᾶς---ὅτι
Not even----nature---itself---does teach---you-----that

ἀνὴρ----μὲν--------ἐὰν---κομᾷ-‐-------------------ἀτιμία
a man--indeed---if-------he has long hair---a dishonor

αὐτῷ---ἐστιν  ;
to him--it is.

First of all, this verse is not a question, it's a declaration. "Not even nature itself teaches you that if a man has long hair it is a dishonour unto him ". And this agrees with what you said about Smason, who was placed under the Nazarite vow from birth. That no razor would come upon his hair.

Judges 13:5 (KJV)
For, lo, thou shalt conceive, and bear a son; and no razor shall come on his head: for the child shall be a Nazarite unto God from the womb: ....

We have to remember that any translation of the original text is just that, a translation, and as a translation, it's subject to correction when necessary, as the original text allows. And Samson's account as well as Numbers chapter 6 (which is where the law of the Nazarite vow is found) teaches us that 1 Corinthians 11:14 needs correction.

By the way, those under the Nazarite vow, spiritually pointed to the Lord Jesus Christ, as he was a Nazarene. But whether or not Christ actually had long hair is not mentioned.

Matthew 2:23 (KJV)
And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.

[Inquirer]

[Replying to Eddie Ramos in post #2]

This is interesting but I cannot find anything written about this, it seems every translation has this in the form of a question.

[Eddie Ramos]

[Replying to Eddie Ramos in post #2]

This is interesting but I cannot find anything written about this, it seems every translation has this in the form of a question.

Best place to look is in an interlinear Bible which contains the original text along with Strong’s numbers and a literal English translation. Bible Hub is not a bad site to use.

As far as what every translation has written, we should keep in mind that even if every translation is in agreement on how a particular verse is translated, it doesn't mean that they have translated it correctly. God has preserved his Word (in its original languages) so that everyone has something to compare each translation against. There are actually numerous examples that can be given where translations are in agreement, yet they still translated it incorrectly.

Matthew 28:1 is a perfect example. Every translation is basically unanimous on how that verse is translated, yet when you compare it to the origin text, you may notice that it says something altogether different.

I suppose God allowed these mistakes in the translations in order to make us search for truth as we search for hid treasure.

Proverbs 25:2 (KJV)
2 It is the glory of God to conceal a thing (a WORD):
but the honour of kings is to search out a matter (a WORD).

[1213]

1 Corinthians chapter 11.
Paul speaks of how it is disgraceful for men to have long hair but that for women it is their glory.
That a man must uncover his head to worship but women cover. Paul explains why.

I find this confusing. Samson's strength was in his hair. Popular images and classic paintings invariably show Jesus and his disciples with long hair.

Length of hair has cultural, religious and social implications in many parts of the world. So how important is it?

My opinion is, it is not as important as to love others as Jesus told.

But it is an interesting scripture because, if long hair is women's glory, why cover it? If there is a good reason for to do so, then it is good to do so. And respect for others can be a good reason. Also, if one does it because loves God and thinks it is God's will, then it is good. But I don't think that is demanded by God, because Paul says it was more like a custom.

But if any man seems to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither do God’s assemblies.
1 Cor. 11:16

[Rose2020]

[Replying to 1213 in post #5]
A good point, perhaps it is that nature even helps in the covering of women's heads. I too think it is custom rather than command.

[JehovahsWitness]

1 Corinthians chapter 11.
Paul speaks of how it is disgraceful for men to have long hair but that for women it is their glory. ...I find this confusing. Samson's strength was in his hair.

Samson was a Nazarite, which was a person under a special devotional vow to Jehovah (God), this was not the norm for the Jews, so in the Jesiwh culture, long hair in a man, who was not under a special devotion, would not have been seen as fitting .




Paul was writing to the Christians (predominately from a Greek /pagan background) who were not under Mosaic law. For them too (as is the case today) it was the women that generally wore their hair long. A man with long hair would have been considered an anomally and possibly in the context of Corinth (a center of immoral pagan worship) a homosexual or sexual deviant. The principle for today is not that women cannot have short hairstyle but that both sexes should avoid styles that are associated with cross dressing, homosexual lifestyles or transgenderism.

CONCLUSION Paul was not speaking to an audience that would have associated long hair with being a Nazarine. He was just pointing out the generally accepted norm of his time.





RELATED POSTS

Did Jesus have long hair?
viewtopic.php?p=947656#p947656

What did Jesus look like?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 94#p925494

What did Paul mean that "nature" teaches us about hair?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 27#p814927
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 44#p866744

Are the Apostles Peter and Paul prohibiting the wearing of gold and the braiding of hair?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 31#p797831

Why did Paul speak of long hair only for women since Samson had long hair?
viewtopic.php?p=1088325#p1088325

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

JESUS CHRIST, APPEARANCE, and ...JEHOVAH'S WITNESS ARTWORK

[Rose2020]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #7]

That is as I suspected.