Hair Length for Men – How Short or How Long?

Notice what Paul said to the Corinthians about men’s hair length:

Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him,

1 Corinthians 11:14

It should be understood that men’s hair length wasn’t the main issue here, but rather women covering their head during worship. Secondly, Paul doesn’t say it’s a sin for a man to have long hair; only that it’s disgraceful—shameful—for him to have long hair. Is this an across-the-board statement for men in every culture and time period? And what did he mean by the “very nature of things,” which was his criteria for shorter hair length? In answering these questions we must throw off our personal and cultural biases and strive to “rightly divide” God’s Word, meaning properly interpret it through sound hermeneutical principles, like “Context is king” and “Scripture interprets Scripture” (2 Timothy 2:15).

As far as “nature” goes, Paul obviously wasn’t referring to the nature of the animal kingdom in light of male lions having big manes while females have none. Also, consider the male and female peacock.

Nor was Paul saying that long hair for men was against God’s nature. After all, if God considered it a shame for men to have long hair He would’ve never instituted long hair as a part of the Nazarite vow of consecration unto the LORD:

“During the entire period of their Nazirite vow, no razor may be used on their head. They must be holy until the period of their dedication to the LORD is over; they must let their hair grow long.”

Numbers 6:5

If the LORD’s very nature decreed that it was disgraceful for men to have long hair then there would be no exception. Consider the example of adultery: God’s nature decrees that adultery is a sin and hence there are no exceptions. In other words, adultery is never permitted, excusable or tolerable. If the LORD hated long hair on men due to His nature, then he would’ve hated long hair on Samson, which obviously wasn’t the case because, as a Nazarite, Samson was consecrated unto the LORD (Judges 13:5). In fact, again, Samson’s uncut hair was a sign of his separation unto God. It’s the same with John the Baptist in the New Testament, who was a Nazirite from birth (Luke 1:13–17).

While Samson is commended in the New Testament for his faith (Hebrews 11:32), the Old Testament reveals that he had some serious flesh problems, like a hot temper and a severe weakness for the ladies, to the point of visiting prostitutes (you can read the account of his life in Judges 13-16). Yet these serious flaws didn’t result in the loss of God’s anointing. It’s significant to point out that Samson only lost his anointing when his hair was cut. Moreover, a Nazarite was not supposed to come in contact with anything dead (Numbers 6:6), but Samson got honey from a lion carcass and didn’t lose God’s blessing upon doing this either (Judges 14:8-9). Again, he only lost God’s blessing after his hair was cut.

So what did Paul mean by this statement that “the very nature of things” shows that it’s shameful for a man to have long hair?

He wasn’t referring to animal nature or God’s nature, but rather to the social nature—the secular customs—of that particular time period and Corinthian culture. Elsewhere in Paul’s first letter to the Corinthian believers he instructed them to not be a “stumbling block” to others through the exercising of their rights and freedoms (1 Corinthians 8:9). His point about men’s hair length must be viewed in light of this: Paul was trying to get the believers to adhere to the social customs of their time & culture to avoid creating stumbling blocks to others, which would either hinder the spread of the gospel or cause friction in the church. You see, there are only two commands in the New Testament: love God and love people (Matthew 22:36-40). Every other instruction in the New Testament was given for the purpose of fulfilling these two laws.

Also consider the fact that some biblical commands were temporal in nature, based on temporary social situations, like Paul’s insisting that women pray with veils on (1 Corinthians 11:3-15). Women showed submission to their husbands by wearing a veil in Corinthian society. Apparently, some women in the Corinthian church were discarding their veils, which was something only idolatrous temple prostitutes or other ungodly women would do. It was considered a dishonor to the husband for a woman to come to a Christian fellowship without her veil, not to mention culturally confusing. Just the same, for a man to wear a veil or otherwise have his head covered during worship was simply not appropriate in Corinth.

What we have to understand about culture is that it doesn’t remain constant; it’s ever-changing. These kinds of “laws”—actually instructions or, in the case of Paul’s word on men’s hair length, a brief statement—were simply a means to fulfilling the two New Testament commandments—love God and love people. Whereas these two laws are permanent, other instructions and lesser points were only applicable to a particular people for a particular era in a particular place. So Paul indirectly discouraged men in ancient Corinth from having long hair in keeping with the second greatest command: To love one’s neighbor as oneself. Paul made the statement because the sight of men with long hair might have offended believers in the church and unbelievers outside the church, thus hindering the message of Christ, which isn’t true in most cultures in the modern world. Long hair is no longer tied to male prostitution or any other wicked activity, as it was in Corinth. Generally speaking, social nature no longer considers it a shame for a man to have long hair in most cultures. In cultures or sub-cultures where it is considered a shame then Christian men should conform accordingly in order to not unnecessarily offend or hinder the spread of the gospel.

Also, let’s not forget that God is more concerned with what’s going on in our hearts than our physical appearance.

We conclude that Paul wasn’t referring to animal nature or the nature of God when he said that the “very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him” (1 Corinthians 11:14); rather, he was referring to the social nature of the culture of Corinth in the mid first century, which doesn’t apply to all cultures today.

A Similar Position

A similar-but-alternative view is that Paul was simply appealing to biology in order to encourage the Corinthians to live according to the cultural traditions of the area. His point was that women typically have longer hair than men and the latter are prone to baldness. In short, women have a God-given “natural veil” whereas men have a natural “uncovered head.” So Paul argued that if women reject the mark of their submission in that culture—the veil—they may as well just shave their heads (1 Corinthians 11:6).

As far as men go, Paul maintained that it is unnatural for him to have long hair because men’s hair is naturally thinner and, again, prone to balding, which he relates to men not wearing a head covering during worship in that culture. So Paul was merely encouraging the believers to comply with the standard customs of male and female appearance in Corinth.

Actually, Paul’s command for men to not wear a hat is simply (and obviously) a direct contra-Jewish position.

To explain, a Hebrew who took a Nazirite vow was instructed to have long hair as a sign of his separation unto the LORD (Numbers 6). Long hair was a sign of submission and the Nazirite was to submit to God. Similarly, a wife was to submit to her husband, which is why she has long hair within Israelite society. Jewish men have always worn a hat at worship as a sign of their submission under the Law (Torah). Jewish men even today wear a kippah at synagogue. So long hair in Hebrew society was/is a sign of submission.

Paul was saying that we are no longer under the Law (which you can read further about here). Thus we don’t need to wear a kippah to church assemblies. A man’s head should be UNCOVERED when he prays because believers are free men, coheirs with Christ (Romans 8:17). We are not children under authority, we are not slaves under a master (Galatians 3:24). Thus we need not cover our head:

A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God.

1 Corinthians 11:7

A slave, a child, (a messenger), is not the image and glory of God. Remember the hermeneutic rule: Context is King. The passage just before 1 Corinthians 11 where it talks about hair+hat coverings is 1 Corinthians 10, which covers the freedom of the believer.

Thus Paul’s position on men not wearing a hat to Christian assembly is simply a direct contra-Jewish teaching.

Did Christ have Long Hair?

We don’t know how long Jesus’ hair was because there are no illustrations of him from that time period and photos did not exist back then, unless you consider the Shroud of Turin a legitimate impression of Christ, which indicates long hair.

In any case, many people today obviously think Christ had long hair due to numerous historical illustrations and more recent cinematic portrayals. Is this inaccurate? We can’t be categorical on the topic since the Bible says nothing about the Messiah’s hair length. However, if Jesus looked like the average Middle Eastern man in the early 1st century, any artistic and cinematic depictions of Christ as effeminate are definitely inaccurate. For proof, see this article.

Male Jews traditionally kept much shorter hair than Hebrew women, although there were no particular laws except for those reflecting the point that men should look like men and women should look like women (e.g. Deuteronomy 22:5).

On that note, long hair on men doesn’t automatically make them effeminate. Did George Armstrong Custer or Wild Bill Hickock look remotely effeminate? How about Civil War soldiers? How about American Indian warriors?

Related Topics:

Jesus Christ — Milksop or Mighty Lord?

Comparing Jesus Christ with… Superman

Demons Vs. Jesus Christ — No Contest!

Christ: “The Anointed One” — What Does it Mean? What Does “Jesus” Mean?

Was Jesus Homeless?

The Left’s Unbalanced View of Christ & Christianity

Jesus Christ — Milksop or Mighty Lord?

No Effeminate Jesus!

In modern Western culture Jesus Christ is largely portrayed and perceived as a milksop – timid, weak, ineffectual, even effeminate. In colloquial terms, this means a wimp, pantywaist, sissy or wuss. You don’t have to look far to find support for this. I recently saw a T-shirt on the internet that blatantly said “Jesus is a ****.” I can’t say the word but it essentially meant “Jesus is a wuss.” Sterile religion and worldly culture has fostered this false image to the point that it’s the general perception of most people, spoken or unspoken. As such, when the average person thinks of Jesus Christ they think of “gentle Jesus meek and mild” rather than the awesome Lion of Judah. I’m not saying that Jesus didn’t have a gentle side, but – please – how about some balance?!

When I was a lost teenager my impression of Jesus Christ wasn’t good. I perceived him as a wimpy doormat when nothing could be further from the truth. I turned to the LORD at the age of 20 and immediately started consuming God’s Word voraciously. Something really blew me away – the spectacular and powerful depictions of both Father God and Jesus Christ, who are One (John 10:30). I was like, “Whoa! Who’s this?” What I saw totally contradicted what religion and culture had taught me.

Simply put, the false image of Jesus Christ is a lie concocted by the enemy to deceive people and prevent them from following the Lord of Lords, particularly men who refuse to follow someone they don’t respect. And it’s impossible to respect a weakly milksop.

Consider how the Scriptures actually portray Jesus Christ…

The Pre-Incarnate Christ

Before his incarnation Jesus appeared many times in Old Testament periods; these manifestations are called theophanies or Christophanies, manifestations of God or Christ in the physical realm. Here’s an example:

Now when Joshua was near Jericho, he looked up and saw a man standing in front of him with a drawn sword in his hand. Joshua went up to him and asked, “Are you for us or for our enemies?” (14) “Neither,” he replied, “but as commander of the army of the LORD I have come.” Then Joshua fell facedown to the ground in reverence, and asked him, “What message does my Lord have for his servant?” (15) The commander of the LORD’s army replied, “Take off your sandals, for the place where you are standing is holy.” And Joshua did so.

Joshua 5:13-15

The “commander of the army of the LORD” in this passage is the pre-incarnate Christ. Tell me, does this Commander strike you as a milksop or as a mighty warrior that commands respect and awe? Notice how he responds when Joshua asks him if he’s on Israel’s side or the people of Jericho’s side: “Neither, but as commander of the army of the LORD I have come.” It’s so succinct but it’s potent and speaks volumes: Jesus Christ is so mighty, so great – so incredibly awesome – he’s above the mundane conflicts of this world. Just the same, he’s above the perpetual squabbling of the left-wing and right-wing factions of our governments today.

Other examples of the pre-incarnate Christ in the Old Testament include the “man” Jacob wrestled with (Genesis 32:22-30) and the Angel of the LORD who commissioned Gideon to fight the Midianites (Judges 6:11-16).

Christ During His Earthly Ministry

When Jesus was on earth and ministered for 3½ years he was brilliant in argumentation (Matthew 22:15-22). He astonished and silenced his enemies (Luke 20:26) to the point that “no one dared ask him anymore questions” (Mark 12:34). Does this sound like an impotent milksop?

Furthermore, Jesus was dynamic – full of energy, power, passion and life. He had aura of pizzazz, not stultifying dullness. Want evidence?

Jesus said he was life and could therefore offer abundant life to anyone who chose to follow him (John 14:6 & 10:10).
Because Jesus possessed abundant life he had a vibrant spirit of joy; he was not always ultra-solemn and sorrowful; and he certainly wasn’t boring.
Jesus had wholehearted conviction about what he knew – he truly believed what he preached and his aura of authority was palpable (Matthew 7:28-29).

Jesus was incredibly bold, outspoken and had no qualms about offending people who were deserving of correction:

He was invited to a dinner party with some Pharisees and immediately began insulting the host and honored guests, not because he was abusive but because they needed rebuked (Luke 11:37-53). This is tough love.
Jesus was forthright and honest – he got straight to the point and didn’t beat around the bush with overly diplomatic language (Matthew 15:1-20 & 18:7).

One of the most amazing examples of Jesus’ incredible boldness and power can be seen when he cleared the temple of ungodly fools:

On reaching Jerusalem, Jesus entered the temple area and began driving out those who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves, (16) and would not allow anyone to carry merchandise through the temple courts. (17) And as he taught them, he said, “Is it not written: ‘My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations, but you have made it a den of robbers.’ ”

(18) The Chief priests and the teachers of the law heard this and began looking for a way to kill him, for they feared him, because the whole crowd was amazed at his teaching.

Mark 11:15-18

Notice that Jesus radically threw over tables and benches and would not allow anyone to carry merchandise through the temple courts. Does this sound like “gentle Jesus meek and mild” or the bold Lion of Judah? Can you imagine Jesus not allowing anyone to carry goods into the temple?

Believe it or not, Jesus cleared the temple in this manner twice during his earthly ministry. This account took place near the end of his ministry, but he also cleared the temple near the beginning — three years earlier — as detailed in John 2:13-17. On the earlier occasion he made a whip and utilized it in driving out the animals, yelling and scattering coins!

And notice the response of the legalists in Mark 11:18: They feared him! They feared him so much that they decided to kill him and remove him from the scene altogether. Let me tell you something, impotent milksops don’t inspire fear and they certainly don’t provoke VIPs to plot to murder them. Also, notice how the people who witnessed him clear the temple responded: They were amazed! Dull sissies don’t inspire amazement, but people who are dynamic, courageous and authoritative do! (And by “authoritative” I don’t mean authoritarian, which is abusive. ‘Abuse’ is the misuse of power).

All over the gospel accounts we see evidence of Christ being courageous, astonishing, amazing, authoritative and even frightening! Just look up these passages: Matthew 7:28-29, 14:26, Mark 1:27, 2:10-12, 4:37-43, 7:37, Luke 5:8-11, 7:14-16, 20:20-26, 20:40 and the aforementioned John 2:13-17. People who insinuate that Jesus was some effeminate weakling obviously don’t know how to read!

Jesus’ Crucifixion and Triumphant Return

What about Jesus’ torturous crucifixion? Any of us who have seen The Passion of the Christ realize that no pansy could face that incredible challenge, let alone endure it.

Although he came to this world as a lamb to be sacrificed he shall return as a mighty warrior, as shown in Revelation 19:11-16. Please check out this passage and you’ll see that the mighty Messiah is anything but a pitiful weakling.

Lamb or Chief Shepherd and Anointed One?

Speaking of being a lamb, Jesus was a sheep only in the sense that he was a sacrificial lamb for the sins of the world (Revelation 13:8). In truth, he was and is “the good shepherd” or “Chief Shepherd” (John 10:11,14 & 1 Peter 5:4), a powerful leader who leads not only by word, but by example and service.

‘Christ’ means “Anointed One” and ‘Christian’ means “little anointed one” or “like the Anointed One.” Hence, Christians are to be like their leader, Jesus Christ.

This certainly means walking in love, kindness, peace, gentleness and humility, but these traits have been emphasized at the expense of Christ’s more dynamic qualities noted above. It goes without saying that the body of Christ needs to cultivate Jesus’ more masculine attributes as well as the softer ones. It’s simply a matter of balance. Christians are sheep in the sense that they follow the “good shepherd” not in the sense that they’re weak pushovers.

Furthermore, followers of the Mighty Lord possess abundant life and dunamis power. ‘Dunamis’ is the Greek word for power, which is where we get the English words dynamic and dynamite. This power is available to every believer but we have to “fan it into flame” (2 Timothy 1:6-7). Tell me, does “abundant life” and “dynamite power” sound boring and weak? No, they’re exciting and explosive and believers will walk in them more and more as they take hold of the eternal life – the life-of-the-age-to-come – to which they’re called (1 Timothy 6:12).

Let me leave you with a passage to chew on:

the righteous are as bold as a lion.

Proverbs 28:1

Amen.

Christ: “The Anointed One” — What Does it Mean? What Does “Jesus” Mean?

Are Believers “Sheep”?