long hair on men....vanity?
Posted by paul b. on September 16, 2001 at 16:50:16: Previous Next
doth nature itself not teach that long hair on men is a shame.....just a thought,read this in the bible...for years i had long hair,and i gotta admit i was a little vain about my hair...then the marine corps took my vanity when they shaved my head,lol...not pointing fingers here,,,just wondering if perhaps that scripture was words of wisdom or just words. "to each his on"......
Re: long hair on men....vanity?
Posted by Longhaired Boy on September 16, 2001 at 17:30:10: Previous Next
In Reply to: long hair on men....vanity? posted by paul b. on September 16, 2001 at 16:50:16:
: doth nature itself not teach that long hair on men is a shame.....just a thought,read this in the bible...for years i had long hair,and i gotta admit i was a little vain about my hair...then the marine corps took my vanity when they shaved my head,lol...not pointing fingers here,,,just wondering if perhaps that scripture was words of wisdom or just words. "to each his on"......
What will you say ?
Re: long hair on men....vanity?
Posted by longhairedman on September 16, 2001 at 21:39:00: Previous Next
In Reply to: long hair on men....vanity? posted by paul b. on September 16, 2001 at 16:50:16:
: doth nature itself not teach that long hair on men is a shame.....just a thought,read this in the bible...for years i had long hair,and i gotta admit i was a little vain about my hair...then the marine corps took my vanity when they shaved my head,lol...not pointing fingers here,,,just wondering if perhaps that scripture was words of wisdom or just words. "to each his on"......
:In Corinthians (where this statement is made), it also states that short hair on women is a shame to them. Why do some women still wear their hair short? Aren't they shamed for wearing their hair short. Absolutely not!!! That's one of the reasons I keep my hair long. If some women are not shamed to wear their hair short, WHY IS IT A SHAME FOR MEN OR BOYS TO WEAR THEIR HAIR LONG? In addition, why don't guys like you harrass women for wearing their hair short? As far as nature is concerned, nature tells me alot of things: Women aren't supposed to have careers, men should be authority of the family,not women (which is why, according to the bible, they should have long hair because they are under authority of the man), guys shouldn't be wearing earings and necklasses, only girls should, etc. Why is nature NOT being followed here? And last, guys being vain about their long hair. NOT TRUE!!! Look at all of the vain short haired guys out there like Timothy McVeigh, and the terrorists who distroyed the word trade center, the pentagon, and the many innocent lives along with it (Aren't these guys ashamed for what they have done by the way?). And don't get me started about long haired men and being gay and lazy. I don't think so. There are more short haired gay guys than long haired ones, and there are short haired lazy guys too. Sorry if you may take offense to this, but I'm sick and tired of people coming to this board like you and stereotyping us, and using the bible to justify "rules" for hair length on men and boys. As I stated above, If women and girls can break the "rules" of nature, why can't men and boys?
Re: long hair on men....vanity?
Posted by johnboy on September 17, 2001 at 17:29:20: Previous Next
In Reply to: Re: long hair on men....vanity? posted by longhairedman on September 16, 2001 at 21:39:00:
The I Corinthians verses need to be taken in their CONTEXT (a mistake made by most Bible-thumping antagonists to longhairs).
I am a born-again believer who is also a longhair - no problem.
Every indication shows that Jesus Christ, if He were present on earth today, appearing as he did in His time, would be considered a "long-hair" by most ultra-conservative Christians. So what was Paul referring to when he wrote those words (under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit)?
Paul was writing to the Corinthians because of their historical culture. Long hair on men (and short hair on women) in their culture at that time were was a sign that they were prostitutes (or at least homosexually inclined). Paul was calling the Corinthians to be "set apart" from any potential question of being "of the world."
Today, the hair length issue no longer holds the same label. Straight, gay, or otherwise sexually inclined, hair length is not an indicator.
The primary reaction to a "longhair" is probably rooted in the WWI and WWII era, when short hair was an indicator of being in the military. Look at pre WWI picture and you will probably see a few men with shoulder-length hair, popular at the time.
Anyway, when the children of the 50's and 60's started going long, it was an affront to the highly patriotic generation. And many still haven't forgiven them. (I remember the ever used phrase "long-haired hippie freak," - though I was not one at the time.)
It amuses me that the "boomers" are coming down on the younger generations for doing what they did a couple of decades ago. Maybe they're just jealous.
Long hair is not a vanity, unless it is worshipped by the wearer. If that is the case then, Biblically, you have a problem. But if you wear it becasue you think that is the best style for you - live long and prosper.
Sermon over.
Re: long hair on men....vanity?
Posted by Longhaired Dude on September 17, 2001 at 11:21:22: Previous Next
In Reply to: long hair on men....vanity? posted by paul b. on September 16, 2001 at 16:50:16:
: doth nature itself not teach that long hair on paul b. is a shame.....
Doth? What normal person talks like that? What century do you live in ?
Re: long hair on men....vanity?
Posted by reflective on September 20, 2001 at 22:34:19: Previous Next
In Reply to: long hair on men....vanity? posted by paul b. on September 16, 2001 at 16:50:16:
: doth nature itself not teach that long hair on men is a shame?
The answer to this question is NO!