- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
03 Feb 12
Originally posted by moon1969No, see my post in your other idiotic thread for why.
"Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?" 1 Corinthians 11:14.
Paul is the architect of Christianity, is he not. We should listen to him?
03 Feb 12
Originally posted by moon1969Well it seems Mr. Goooyfudge is being awefully friendly to you today isn't he?
"Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?" 1 Corinthians 11:14.
Paul is the architect of Christianity, is he not. We should listen to him?
06 Feb 12
Originally posted by moon1969In discussing the matter of headship with the Corinthian congregation, Paul called
"Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?" 1 Corinthians 11:14.
Paul is the architect of Christianity, is he not. We should listen to him?
attention to the rule that a woman should wear a head covering when praying or
prophesying before the congregation, as a sign of subjection. In illustration, he
says: “Does not nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonour
to him; but if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her? Because her hair is given
her instead of a headdress.”—1Co 11:14, 15.
Paul’s reference to “nature itself” evidently included more than “custom,” which he
mentions in verse 16 in connection with the use of a head covering by women.
Hereditary characteristics also likely had a bearing on what Christians in Corinth
viewed as natural. Among Europeans (such as the Greeks), the hair of women,
when left uncut, usually becomes considerably longer than that of men. But this is
not true of the straight hair of Orientals and Indians or of the woolly hair of Blacks
and Melanesians.
In addition to their awareness of hereditary qualities among them, the Christians in
Corinth knew that it was the general practice for men to clip their hair to a moderate
length. This was common also among Jewish men; so the long uncut hair of Nazirites
marked them as men who were not following the general custom. (Nu 6:5) On the
other hand, Jewish women usually wore their hair quite long. (Lu 7:38; Joh 11:2)
And in the Greek city of Corinth, shaving a woman’s head, or clipping her hair very
short, was a sign of her being a slave or of her being in disgrace for having been
caught in fornication or adultery.—1Co 11:6.
So, when saying that “nature itself” taught them, Paul evidently had in mind various
factors that would influence their attitude as to what was natural.
source: Jehovahs Witnesses.
06 Feb 12
Originally posted by twhiteheadnot for prejudicial religio-phobes like you who proffer their opinions on books that they
Do you have any references for this, or are the Jehovahs Witnesses as ill informed about nature as Paul was?
have never read. Ill informed, if any one knows ill informed, its got to be you.
06 Feb 12
2 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobieOK. Your Jehovahs Witnesses source just made it up. I get it.
not for prejudicial religio-phobes like you who proffer their opinions on books that they
have never read. Ill informed, if any one knows ill informed, its got to be you.
As for proffering opinions on books I have never read, I have already pointed out that that is perfectly valid in some instances and it has nothing to do with being ill informed or otherwise. (but we both know that that comment was only given because you cant stand it when your favourite organization is caught telling porkies).
06 Feb 12
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheaddo your own research and as you have provided no evidence to the contrary ,
OK. Your Jehovahs Witnesses source just made it up. I get it.
As for proffering opinions on books I have never read, I have already pointed out that that is perfectly valid in some instances and it has nothing to do with being ill informed or otherwise. (but we both know that that comment was only given because you cant stand it when your favourite organization is caught telling porkies).
except to display your now obligatory cynicism, i suggest its you who are the one in
ignorance and who are simply content to make things up as evidenced by this latest
proffering of yours, what reason do you have for stating that if left in its natural
state a ladies hair will not grow longer than a mans, evidence nill, self certified
opinion masquerading as something of substance.
In all my years here I have not learned a single thing from you, no not a single
measly iota. Why, because your posts are empty and deviod of any substance, a
reflection of a cynical attitude that has no practical value to anyone or anything, why
you waste our time with these vanities, i do not know, so either post something
interesting or take your contentions to someone that actually cares about them, they
are meaningless to me.