What does 1 Corinthians Verses 6,7,14,15 mean??????

I just wanted to know, so when my wife tells me my hair is "long" and I need a haircut when it reaches 2", I can tell her DHK says it isn't

 

I can give you some fairly good arguments.
I would rather give you the same challenge as Joe. Study the entire passage from verse one to sixteen. Find out why the Lord has comparisons between long hair on woman and short hair on men.
There are ways of finding out how short is short.
This has nothing to do with culture. It is a Biblical mandate that is timeless, just as timeless as baptism and the Lord's Supper. If we keep those ordinances, why not this one? Why are western Christians so opposed to obedience in this area of God's Word, when Christians in the East (Eastern nations) readily obey God in this area?

You want the context?
1 Corinthians 11:2 Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.

 

Hey guys, my fingers can only go so fast, and this post travels a lot farther than yours! Patience please. :type:

 

The fact that Paul was inspired to pen 'Doth not nature itself teach you that it is a shame for a man to have long hair?' by the Holy Ghost should automatically tell you that men should not have long hair. In light of Paul's writing, the Nazarite's who were not allowed to cut their hair must have been required by God to wear the long hair as an act of humility. He had to humble himself to the extent of wearing his hair in a manner that it was shameful for man to wear.

How long is long? I would say if the man is mistaken to be a woman from behind because of the length of his hair, he needs a haircut.

 

Agreed....

 

...so in today's culture, that can be any length, as women wear short hair.

I think you can tell a guy from a woman from behind even with very long hair.

 

Because our preferences are readily honored, and some men choose to have long hair. It is not that unusual. Practical almost, due to the changing weather.

Ok, I took the challenge. Very interesting. Next I'll study the women's hair length.

I believe I understand the definition of short hair. Back then, the adulteress was to be stripped naked and her hair chopped off. Thus her hair being short making her appearance more manly. Imo, it’s got to be pretty short to be able to differentiate between the good and the bad girls. Not all women are able to grow long hair. So short hair is really short. About the length of my hair in my avatar.

You offered a verse to support this. Yet their customs regarding their appearance symbolize respect, shame, sexual sin, humility etc…in their time. It is not so any longer.

We do not shame adulteresses by cutting off their hair making them appear similar to a man and stripping them naked, as that would be sin according to the bible and our laws of the land. The bible tells us "men not to wear that which pertaineth to a woman" so we can tell the sexes apart. In that day, they obviously placed undue emphasis on vain appearance customs, thus sinning, something we are not to do now.
Many sins were committed under the guise of “ordinances” so we have to be careful here.

SFIC mentioned the nazarites had long hair as a sign of humiliation, I agree. Paul probably held the same view so this helps us to understand where he was coming from. Imo, Paul was also probably imagining a guy with long curled hair, or frizzy hair similar to a woman. Not just a haircut blowdryed with some gel or hairspray, but a style which is very feminine.

We don’t keep those ordinances. We don’t treat adulteresses this way, nor force men to humiliate themselves through appearance (long hair similar to a woman's) as we shouldn’t because it is willful sinning. Goes against other scripture verses.

This is a command to the people of that day, except the Lords Supper and Baptism since this is supported by other Scripture. With regards to hair length, it is not something we are to worry about.
My only thoughts are if a man by nature appears female, he ought to have shorter hair. He ought to wear masculine clothing. Because other verses indicate we are to tell the sexes apart. This is where the common sense and judge ye in yourself comes in.

Back then, the head covering was a submission thing. Women were to have a lot of hair covering their heads, yet allowances were made if they were not able to grow enough hair. They followed other customs to compromise for their lack of hair. Submission still applies today, yet not in the vain form of appearance except where Scripture supports that. Women are to look like women, men are to look like men. Unbelievable how vain these folks were baack then

Here is an easier translation cut and pasted of verse 1-16

Short hair is shorter than I understood. Though it is not practical due to the cold weather, I will get a haircut. My hair is thick, and grows very fast. Here in California, the summers are very hot, so short hair helps alot, less sweat down your back especially when bike riding. The winters are very cold so longer hair can keep your neck warm, especially when riding. Prevent you from getting your death of cold. This is another reason why it's hard to believe the Lord would place restrictions on hair length, it doesn't seem practical.

Still don't understand what nature means in "doth not even nature itself teaches you" (highlighted in red)

Imo, there is no reason why a men can't have long hair unless his appearance thus becomes too similar to a woman's.

 

Wow! That is the lamest excuse I have ever heard! If you look in my profile you will see that I am a missionary, and that I presently live in Canada. Where I live the temperature can get below minus 50. I used live in a nation where the temperature got up to 50 C (120 F). I went from one of the coldest nations to one of the hottest nations. Length of hair has nothing to do with climate. There are bald Eskimos and bald Arabs alike.

There is nothing to say that anyone was stripped naked.
There is nothing spoken of in this passage of any adulteress. Don't read into this passage things that are not there. The passage is speaking of praying and prophesying in church. Prophesy is a spiritual gift that is no longer in operation today, but we all pray. And their is a greater principle being taught.

Why are you bringing sexual sins and such into a passage of Scripture that doesn't speak of sexual sins. This is a rabbit trail. And just as in this chapter the Lord's Supper is not confined to their time, neither is the matter of the head covering or length of hair. It is not your preogative to cut out parts of the Bible because you don't like them. One cannot say that it doesn't apply to me because it was their culture. God has not changed.

This passage has nothing to do with adulteresses!!! KEEP on TOPIC!

All of what you said is totally off topic. It has nothing to do with 1Cor.11:1-16

What are you talking about. Read 1Cor.11:17ff and find out about the abuse of the ordinance of the Lord's Table. Verse 30 says: For this cause many among you are sick, and weakly, and many of you sleep (are dead).
Yes, God judges sin. So be careful about how you treat this command of head-coverings and the length of hair. When the Corinthians abused the privileges of the Lord's Table God killed some of them.

The context is headship. The man is the head of the woman, as Christ is the head of the man. That is the context of 1Cor.11:1-16.

Paul didn't imagine things. He got his revelation straight from God. This is the inspired Word of God. It is what God wanted Paul to write. Your response above seems a bit flippant.

Please show me just one time in this passage where "adulteress" is used. You seem very confused about this passage. It has nothing to do with adultery. If God gives a command and we don't keep it then it is sin. That is plain and simple. We have no excuse. Who are you to say we don't keep these ordinances? Do you over-rule God? What has short hair got to do with the humiliation of men? Absolutely nothing! Perhaps your pride is being hurt and that is all.

Can you demonstrate through Scripture? Can you give one good reason for stating that? You have offered an opinion without Scriptural support.

If I were you, I would be very concerned what the Bible says--all of it.

All of that is true. But the passage in question teaches even more than that.

That is silliness. How many women do you know that are not able to grow enough hair to look feminine? I don't know of any. You are making excuses. People didn't undergo chemotherapy for cancer in those days.

Where are you getting this stuff from. In more than 30 years of teaching the Scriptures I have never heard this. Do you want to give some reference material, so that I have more than just your opinion.

The vanity applies more today for men who want to wear their hair long, and women who want to wear thier hair short. Therein is the vanity and all of that in defiance to the Lord's command.

As I mentioned previously, climate doesn't even enter into this equation. It is irrelevant.

Look at other cultures all around the world. It is "natural" that a man have short hair, and a woman have long hair.

Then take your argument up with God.

 

Bald eskimos, bald Arabs, good grief. Those people need to grow more hair to stay warm. And it isn't my lame excuse, it's my reasons which are valid. Try riding your bike in the 30-40 degree cold without enough hair to cover your neck, it makes a huge difference regarding comfort. Must ride or I become sad or too hyper, not good. I am almost resistant to penicilin, amoxicillin etc.. due to taking it so much for sore throats as a kid. I was resistant for a few years, stayed pretty ill for a while. I carry the strep virus due to that, so I almost always have a light sore throat ready to flare up due to the cold weather blowing on me. A fan pointing into my face, even in the warm weather often causes my throat to flare up and become sore. Usually I ignore it and it isn't too bad but I can get sicker, and run a high temperature. Taking antibiotics causes my system to bemore resistant each time so when I am old and need them, they may not work at all. Just finished Zithromyacin for a sinus infection. This is a concern of my Doctor and why he doesn't like to prescribe them. They barely work now, but they do have some slight impact on a real bad strep throat. I work hard to exercise and eat right to keep my immune system as high as possible, and I am usually just fine.
So your area is much colder, but maybe you are healthier.
And it is not the lamest excuse you have ever heard with your exclamation point. You're rude as hell. At least save it until you have replied to me since you seem to have a lot of smarts I can learn from, told me what and how to look it up. Now suddenly you don't have any patience for the end result. show that much respect for a fellow brother in Christ.

I didn't. There doesn't have to be anything in the passage. It was what was happening in that day, so it is a valid example. A shaved head was the sign of an adulteress/Prostitute so why don't we do that today. We have to determine what the Lord wants us to do in this day and age, not just follow along with the pact of their traditions and customs blindly. Especially when they are demented and don't apply to us.

Alright

It was to point out/understand the significance and reason for their shaved heads not their sins so much.

I researched and can't where it indicates the headcovering/length of hair is binding today. There were valid reasons for this at that time which no longer exist, unlike the Lords supper. I understand this conclusion due to the principal of the passage -the principal of headship which applies today.

Why do you say that. I am serious, and want to know the truth. Agreed, God has not changed but their customs regarding hair are not from God. It is man made tradition, part of their culture. God required the Nazarites to grow their hair out and later shave it.
The principal of headship applies today.

Quit yelling grouchy

It has something to do with it, it is a man made tradition used as an example. I want to ensure we are following what applies to today, not drugging up traditions and customs from ancient history.

I don't know. I did.

Ok I will

Agreed :thumbs:

Not flippant, and again, I am seriously trying to learn this whether you want to believe it or not. It's not because I care so much about my hair length. I never said Paul imagined things, he's not schizophrenic. I said he imagined possibly a man looking very feminine with long hair, such as curled hair or frizzy hair similar to a woman's with regards to that verse about men with long hair. I have no scriptural support so imo, it was a pretty good guess.

I can't

I am

Agreed

1Co 11:16 But if any man seems to be contentious, we have no other practice, nor have the churches of God."

"But if one is inclined to be contentious, we have no other practice, nor have the churches of God."

Paul too the Nazarite vow once. So his hair was long, short, or he had none. Both males and females who took this vow grew their hair out and later shaved it. Funny that there is no distinction regarding hair lengths between the sexes here.
And this means Paul is telling men it's wrong to wear their long hair yet he wore his hair long for a bit.

So..... ?

 

I have to go with DHK on this one. Why do we alway push to the very limit of how far can we go?? Why not see how close we can live to God's word instead??
One thing for sure the scripture don't mean for us to do any old way we want, about the hair, for the scripture was put there for some reason and not to just take up space. Also, Paul is not going to write a whole chapter and then say "if any man be contentous, just forget it".

BBob,

 

When I read the first letter to the Corinthian church one word stands out - carnal.
Paul is disappointed with these believers because they were immature.

"And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ." (3:1)

Why?

"For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?" (3:3)

Gal 5:19-20 "Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,"

It is easy to see the first part of the list, but the second hits a little closer to home. I think the issues Paul is addressing in I Cor . 11 is not hair follicles and cloth, but rather summed up in the next 2 1/2 chapters: the body of Christ and love.

Most people think that the second half of chapter 11 is about eating bread and drinking wine but I think it is about fellowship. Most people picture this group of believers walking down the streets toward a brick building with a bell ringing saying it is about time for church and taking part in a ritual. It was most likely what we call a potluck. Notice how some were eating before others got there? They didn't care enough about each other to wait. That is not love. This is not how a body is to operate.

That is the context of I Cor 11. Now what do all these verses mean? It means that not much has changed in the church or in churches. There is still carnal thinking resulting in the works of the flesh listed above. We have "long hair" churches that listen to contemporary music for one group and we have the opposite for the "conservatives". Actually we have two churches in one now. There is the 9:00 "service" for the conservatives who get to bed on time and the 11:00 "service" for the long hairs that stay out late. One is "traditional" the other more upbeat.

The Corinthian church had issues, many of them. Paul has been addressing them one after the other up to this point. When he gets to chapter 11 he gets to their hang ups about their "heads". They were clearly divided over the issues of veils and hair. Paul does not set out to tell them the proper way to have a CHRISTIAN hair-do or what to put or not put on their heads. Rather he wants them to get focused on truth.

So he teaches them about what we call headship: Christ being the head of each man and each man being the head of his wife. This is truth. Jesus told us that the truth would set us free and these truths bring freedom if understood properly. A woman will only be "free" if she has something on her head and this is called "power" in verse 10. It has to do with being under authority as opposed to rebelling like the angels. They were not content with their position and wanted to "be like God": the temptation that Satan used on Eve. They were free when they were in order, aligned properly under God, but are now in chains because of their rebellion.

This is how we can be free. When a man steps out from under Christ he is not free. When a women steps out of her position of the created order she is not free.

What our carnal minds have done with these truths is to turn them into "laws". In this community, the BaptistBoard.com, the big issue is long hair. In other groups I have been in the veiling of women is the issue that divides. Both have done the opposite of Pauls intention: divide rather than unite. In Ephesians 2 Paul calls Jesus our peace and the Law "enmity".

Eph. 2:14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; 15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; 16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:

We have brought the enmity back with our "Christian Laws" and there is now contention in the body because of them. Paul calls these people who bring in such customs "contentious". Hence, the works of the flesh are manifest.

I think long hair on men looks wrong. Nature teaches me that. I think plaids and stripes look wrong together. Nature teaches me that. I think that somebody that weighs 500 pounds looks wrong. Nature teaches me that. I think a lot of things. I am not going to base my doctrine on what nature teaches me. What I need to do is have the mind of Christ and be spiritually minded.

I Cor 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. 16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.

Back to chapter 11
28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. 29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. 30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. 31 For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.

We have become judges with evil thoughts (James 2:4) and have put the long hairs in the back row.

 

You seem to be saying that the whole chapter don't mean a hill of beans, that we should disregard it, that it really is not talking about long hair, or the covering is a glory to a woman, and that her hair is her covering, if I understand you right. Most people I have run into about this chapter, if they don't want to follow what it literally says, use the verse "if any man be contentous, we have no such custom" and void the whole chapter. You seem to be voiding the whole chapter by saying it don't mean what it says, but truth and love, so forget about the hair and just show love. What a way to teach about love by talking about "long hair".

BBob,

 

I take it you disagree with me. But saying that I disregard the whole chapter doesn't mean anything. I obviously think it means something and since it isn't what you think all you can come up with is "You seem to be saying that the whole chapter don't mean a hill of beans".

What a way to teach about love by talking about "long hair".

I think it is a great way to teach about love. Can you love someone with long hair?

When the gospel came it brought together Jews, gentiles, and barbarians. It knit their hearts together in love. When man got a hold of the gospel he brought in "touch not, taste not, handle not" and by the way, cut your hair. :tear:

 

Sorry my remarks were not more polite, but it still seems you are talking about disregarding the whole chapter as far as hair is concerned, or are you. Do you believe a woman's hair is her glory and it is a shame for a man to have long hair? I may be not understanding you?

BBob,

 

I don't think a woman's hair is her glory. I think it is A glory like it says in I Cor. 11. But I also admit it is nature that teaches me this like it says in I Cor. 11. What is that worth? Well, I like my wife to have her hair long. I also like to see her in certain colors.

I don't like the look of long hair on men. But, I also don't like the look of men in suits and ties (I hope your not offended, I saw your picture), I prefer jeans and a flannel shirt, especially the red and black plaid ones. I also like camo, my three year old boy is such a little man in it. What is that worth, not a whole lot.

In other words I think this is all vain glory when compared to the glory of God and the salvation that I have through the blood of Christ.

A woman dishonors her husband (head) when she does not have her head under his authority. In other words, a woman praying to God without being in submission to her head (husband) is like a rebellious teenager asking God for help on a test at school. They are dishonoring their parents. It is a shame to both a woman and a teenager when they are such hypocrites.

A man that puts himself under the authority of another man dishonors Christ. For example those who need to go to a priest for confession rather than straight to God dishonor the work of Christ. In some circles men are letting their church leaders decide where to send their kids to school or where to work. Look back in the beginning of chapter 3 where these believers were aligning themselves under men like Paul or Apollos. If being under the Apostle Paul is not good imagine what it is like to be under some of the weak men of today. It is a shame to the men who do this.

I Cor 16:13 Watch ye, stand fast in the faith, quit you like men, be strong.

So to answer your question, I am basically disregarding hair as far as it being a command that women are in sin if they do not have long hair. He is using the issue within the church to make a point which he does beautifully. He has been doing it the entire book. If a church wants to have such laws (customs) they are not of God. "we have no such custom, neither the churches of God." (I Cor. 11:16)

 

If any man seem to be contentious (if any man wants to rebel against that which Paul has writtten to them in the previous verses of this Chapter), we have no such custom, neither the Churches of God.

It is quite clear that Paul was not saying we allow long hair in the Churches of God. Why would he tell the Church at Corinth to act different than other Churches he had written to?

Paul said we have no such custom.. no such mutual habitation.

 

So, we are back to where we started, this Chapter is null and void to you.

BBob,

 

I'm failing to see where you are getting that, BBob. His interpretation of the meaning may differ from yours, but I don't see where he just brushes it under the rug.

 

What I am saying is that I am confused, not him, if its not about hair, why did Paul use hair to show us something about "love", if he is? Maybe I am not saying it very well.
If I understood him right, its not about hair at all. If its not about hair, then what is it about. The whole chapter is talking about hair but he says it means something else, maybe he is right, I am just saying if its not about hair then Paul seem to be off the subject he wanted to talk about.

BBob,

 

1Cr 6:9-10 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

1 Tim 4:3 For 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;4 And they shall turn away their ears from the atruth, and shall be turned unto fables.


Effeminate men will not inherit the kingdom of God. Long hair may be linked to this, though I doubt it. I've never met a gay guy with long hair. Yet better to be safe than sorry, imo.

There are a few male members with longer hair in our church, including a Deacon. His hair is short now. I am surprised no one has mentioned it.

Purchased a headcovering (to wear under a helmet) from the Bike store which is much warmer than a head of hair :thumbs:

And I got a haircut today though my hair isn't that long. Not long and flowing.

Now it’s webdogs turn