Did Jesus have a crew-cut? Lifestyles of ancient Israel's rich and famous

Haaretz ^ | December 10, 2013 | Miriam Feinberg Vamosh

[madison10]

Thanks. I could not recall ANYTHING being mentioned in that passage about a woman’s hair...and sure enough it is NOT mentioned.

[madison10]

Whoops, three in a row, just catching up. Make that four.

[Grimmy]

It’s been a long long time since I’ve studied the bible. It is highly probable that I did confuse Nazarene with nazarite.

[CynicalBear]

>> Because none of that is in the Bible, that’s for sure...<<

Which part isn’t in the Bible?

[NYer]

Actually, Jesus had a thin braid on the back of his head. The Shroud of Turin’s image is of a man with long hair. In fact, the image shows one long braid down the man’s back. But that doesn’t mean the image isn’t of Jesus. Jewish law allowed an exalted teacher to wear such a braid so that others recognized the teacher as a special rabbi. It’s difficult to know the true length of Jesus’ hair.

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

“No, it sounds like a Jewish person trying to be polite to his fellow Freepers who happen to be Christians in a theological discussion I was pinged to, and would not join otherwise, as Orthodox Jewish people have a profoundly different view regarding the Nazarine than you.”

---

Seems hypocritical, as you just got done blaming Christianity for atrocity committed against Jews. How is that polite? Do you think that we want to kill you?

[Jewbacca]

Have a nice Sabbath.

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

“Have a nice Sabbath.”

---

I guess trolling is allowable on the sabbath, eh?

[Partisan Gunslinger]

Would you please point to the scripture that teaches that?

1 Chr 11:10

[Partisan Gunslinger]

genesis 6 says absolutely nothing about hair preventing women from demon posession, nor does it say anything about men with long hair being gay and angels posessing them for it

You totally misunderstood what I said. I said that it's a parable. The hair represents the knowledge of Christ for a woman. I didn't say men with long hair are gay, I said if the fallen angels are attracted to a man he is probably gay. They like women.

[Partisan Gunslinger]

That is simply an absurd interpretation of 1Cor. 11, even if Tertullian (who fell into the heresy of Montanism) at least partly held to it, which highly metaphorical manner of interpretation of practical teaching foster Gnosticism. Paul is not engaging in story telling, or metaphorically applying Gn. 6, to the situation, but is literally teaching the need for a head covering, with "because of the angels" referring to angelical beings covering themselves in humble modestly before God, (Is. 6:1,2) and likewise Paul teaches that "women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness," (1Tim. 2:9) Secondarily it could refer to angels recording all that occurs in the service, as they behold what we do (1Cor. 4:9;) and would be shocked by lack of covering which they engage in before their head. You can argue about what this head covering literally was, hair or a veil, but Paul was not talking about keeping evil angels from lusting after shapely women. The issue here is signifying submission to headship, not lust.

Gen 6 is clear to me. The sons of God saw the daughters of Adam and found them attractive and had kids who became the mighty men of old (not normal humans). These offspring filled the world with wickedness and so God flooded the earth to kill them all. Why flood the earth to kill normal humans and then immediately tell Noah to replenish the earth? God would just have to flood the earth again. No, these were fallen angels.

Women should keep their head covered with Christ to keep this from happening again. The fallen angels are coming coming back.

[Partisan Gunslinger]

Thanks. I could not recall ANYTHING being mentioned in that passage about a woman’s hair...and sure enough it is NOT mentioned.

Like I said, it's a deep study. You have to know the parables to equate hair with Christ.

You said what I said was mythology. See my previous post, it happened and will happen again. They will be giving and taking in marriage just as in the days of Noah. See Matt 24:38

[CynicalBear]

Um, that doesn’t even come close to explaining “A woman can avoid this by covering her head with, not her hair, but with the knowledge of Jesus, to know to stay away from the fallen angels”.

How did you think that even came close?

[Partisan Gunslinger]

...and angels posessing them for it

And I didn't say "possessing" them, it was sex.

[Partisan Gunslinger]

Um, that doesn’t even come close to explaining “A woman can avoid this by covering her head with, not her hair, but with the knowledge of Jesus, to know to stay away from the fallen angels”. How did you think that even came close?

I meant Corinthians, not Chronicles. How would hair or a cloth keep a fallen angel from being attracted to a woman? If a woman covers her head with Christ, then she knows what the angels want and can fend them off through the power of Christ. Christ gave us power over the demons (fallen angels). Luke 10

[RaceBannon]

The imaginary connection you made about hair and demons and you insisted it was in Genesis 6...

[CynicalBear]

1 Corinthians 11:10 is also problematic for you in this instance. It is well known that the veil or covering is a sign of subjection. As such the woman is rightly under the covering of the husband as the husband is under the covering of God. The phrase “because of the angels” is more likely to come from the understanding that angels always attend and observe during meetings of Christian worship. Angels would be offended if proper protocol when worshiping God is not observed.

Also, demons or evil spirits are never referred to as angels in the New Testament.

[uncommonsense]

"My post has nothing to do with Jesus. It was a response to Absalom’s long hair mentioned in the post I responded to. Period."

Then why did you reply to this thread on "long hair Jesus" and mention Sampson:

"Do the story of Samson ring a bell?"

That's what threw me off...

This isn't my major peeve regarding misrepresentation of biblical facts. It's pretty insignificant in the grand scheme of doctrine.

But, for everyone who has an interest in what the scriptures say about the appearance of Jesus - they already know the excellent points that Freepers documented in previous posts:

Post #23 from Amendment10 quoting Isaiah "is no beauty that we should desire him" and

post #4 from RaceBannon that Paul said long hair is a shame to a man

plus post #25 from Jewbacca citing numerous scriptures

[MestaMachine]

“Then why did you reply to this thread on “long hair Jesus” and mention Sampson:”

I often read threads without commenting if the title intrigues me. It’s called curiosity. Sometimes what other people have to say is quite interesting.
In this case, if you read the post I was responding to, it was about Absalom’s long hair. My response was a bit tongue in cheek. Like, “Do the name Ruby Begonia ring a bell?”
And that is all I have to say about that.

[Partisan Gunslinger]

The imaginary connection you made about hair and demons and you insisted it was in Genesis 6...

If you think the bible tells you to get a crew cut then go ahead and get one. See if I care. :^)