# Long Haired Godly Men



## Christusregnat (Aug 30, 2008)

Here's something that I've been pondering lately:

Does anyone know the biblical reasoning for why many of the Puritans, and later godly men, wore their hair long? 

http://us.st12.yimg.com/us.st.yimg.com/I/yhst-81483472662466_2013_2250051

Image:John winthrop illustration.3.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Image:GeorgeGillespie.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Image:Samuel Rutherford.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Image:Francis Turretin.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Image:Jonathan Edwards.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I know that some might say this was merely cultural, but I find it hard to believe that so many mighty men of God would be merely subject to cultural expectations. If you think it was cultural, I'd rather not debate. I'm looking for cold, hard evidence (source material?) demonstrating why so many good men took a position which might seem to be at odds with 1 Cor. 11.

By the by, this is practical for me, because I want to grow my hair out long in the winter if I can find a biblical reason to do so.

Cheers,


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Aug 30, 2008)

In England, during the English Civil War times of 1642 to 1651, hair length was emblematic of the disputes between Cavaliers and Roundheads (Puritans). Cavaliers wore longer hair, and were less religious minded, thought of by the Roundheads as lecherous. The more devout Roundheads had short hair, although there were exceptions.[2]​Long hair - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The sources would be interesting to trace. Of the paintings of the Scottish Commissioners to the Westminster Assembly, I note Alexander Henderson was painted with short hair. Gillespie and Rutherford, both younger men, are painted with long hair.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Aug 30, 2008)

Turretin and Edwards have a wig on in their jpeg's...


----------



## JimJr (Aug 30, 2008)

Backwoods Presbyterian said:


> Turretin and Edwards have a wig on in their jpeg's...



I agree, but isn't the purpose of a wig to simulate hair? This debate goes back to the 60's ( well, at least as far as I remember ) when the prevailing question regarding 1Cor. 11 was " how long is long? ". I'm not sure a satisfactory answer was ever arrived at. Certainly not one that pleased everybody.


----------



## Presbyterian Deacon (Aug 30, 2008)

There is no biblical reason for growing your hair longer in the winter.

A practical reason, however, might be a desire for *warmth*. Often times a hat will work just as well.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Aug 30, 2008)

One can assume either folks like Rutherford or Gillespie either believed hair length was relative (one suspects their wives had even longer hair) or they had a different take on 1 Cor. 11:14. Or, possibly, though I don't think it likely, they were only painted with long hair for some reason. As far as the royalist/roundhead distinction noted in my earlier post, those distinctions did not apply to the Scots, and I wonder if the practice was more general since the Scots supported the monarchy (which is why when the king was executed Scotland went to war with England who they had been alligned with against the king). However, what throws that off somewhat is the fact that non Scots (supporters of the English Roundheads) like Owen and Goodwin are depicted with long hair. What do they have to say about 1 Cor. 11:14.
Here is what one Scot, James Durham, said.There is in clothes a base effeminateness amongst men (which someway emasculates or un-mans them) who delight in those things which omen dote upon, as _dressing of hair, powdrings, washing, _(when exceeded in) _rings, jewels, _etc, which are spoken of, and reproved in the daughters of Zion (Isa. 3), and so must be much more unsuitable to men. Also _interchanging of apparel _is condemned; men putting on women’s, and women men’s clothes, which is unsuitable to that distinction of sexes which theLord has made, and is condemned in the Word as a _confusion_, an absurd,unnatural thing, and an inlet to much wickedness; whereof the Dutch annotators,4 as several fathers did long before them, on 1 Cor. 11:14, make men’s nourishing and wearing of long hair, to be some degree; it being given to women, not only for an ornament and covering, but also in part for distinction of the female sex from the male.
​


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Aug 30, 2008)

You know, if virtually EVERY women had WAIST LENGTH hair, then a guy could have hair on his shoulders, and you know what: that's pretty short, just not as short as some others.

Short or long, on men or women, the notion is inherently relative and subjectivistic. We must refuse to be more specific than Scripture. We need to worry about ourselves, and the small compass we have influence over, and not about people (and eras) we cannot do anything about.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Aug 30, 2008)

I'm not worrying about it Bruce; just discussing the question.


Contra_Mundum said:


> You know, if virtually EVERY women had WAIST LENGTH hair, then a guy could have hair on his shoulders, and you know what: that's pretty short, just not as short as some others.
> 
> Short or long, on men or women, the notion is inherently relative and subjectivistic. We must refuse to be more specific than Scripture. We need to worry about ourselves, and the small compass we have influence over, and not about people (and eras) we cannot do anything about.


----------



## Christusregnat (Aug 30, 2008)

NaphtaliPress said:


> Here is what one Scot, James Durham, said.There is in clothes a base effeminateness amongst men (which someway emasculates or un-mans them) who delight in those things which omen dote upon, as _*dressing of hair*, powdrings, washing, _(when exceeded in) _rings, jewels, _etc, which are spoken of, and reproved in the daughters of Zion (Isa. 3), and so must be much more unsuitable to men. Also _interchanging of apparel _is condemned; men putting on women’s, and women men’s clothes, which is unsuitable to that distinction of sexes which theLord has made, and is condemned in the Word as a _confusion_, an absurd,unnatural thing, and an inlet to much wickedness; whereof the Dutch annotators,4 as several fathers did long before them, on 1 Cor. 11:14, make men’s_* nourishing and wearing of long hair,*_ to be some degree; it being given to women, not only for an ornament and covering, but also in part for distinction of the female sex from the male.
> ​



Chris,

Thank you for the info; always helpful.

Would it be safe to assume that Durham condemns the braiding/dressing of hair, rather than the length? He talks about "nourishing and wearing", and I wonder if he just means the effeminate use, or the length, per se. If memory serves, 1 Cor 11 uses two words for the long hair; one for an ornamental/dressed long hair, and the other one for hair that hangs around the shoulders...

Thanks,

Adam


----------



## Christusregnat (Aug 30, 2008)

Contra_Mundum said:


> Short or long, on men or women, the notion is inherently relative and subjectivistic. We must refuse to be more specific than Scripture.



This assumes that the Scriptures are unclear, which the amount of debate does not prove. Paul seems to ground the prohibition of long hair in men in the created order. If this were a relativistic notion, 1. Why would Scripture address it? and 2. How could Paul be so firm on the point if the point at issue had no meaning? 

My point of interest was only that I'm wondering why such men would do such things, if contrary to Scripture. Or, perhaps I'm misunderstanding Scripture. That's all. I don't think it an over-reaching interest in the arcane. 

Cheers,

Adam


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Aug 30, 2008)

I tend to agree; my thought was that he is not talking about just longer hair per se but men treating their hair as women do maybe.


Christusregnat said:


> NaphtaliPress said:
> 
> 
> > Here is what one Scot, James Durham, said.There is in clothes a base effeminateness amongst men (which someway emasculates or un-mans them) who delight in those things which omen dote upon, as _*dressing of hair*, powdrings, washing, _(when exceeded in) _rings, jewels, _etc, which are spoken of, and reproved in the daughters of Zion (Isa. 3), and so must be much more unsuitable to men. Also _interchanging of apparel _is condemned; men putting on women’s, and women men’s clothes, which is unsuitable to that distinction of sexes which theLord has made, and is condemned in the Word as a _confusion_, an absurd,unnatural thing, and an inlet to much wickedness; whereof the Dutch annotators,4 as several fathers did long before them, on 1 Cor. 11:14, make men’s_* nourishing and wearing of long hair,*_ to be some degree; it being given to women, not only for an ornament and covering, but also in part for distinction of the female sex from the male.
> ...


----------



## tdowns (Aug 30, 2008)

*Interesting....*

I let mine go long cuz I hate haircuts, then I buzz cut it because it gets to be a pain...is that Godly?


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Aug 30, 2008)

tdowns007 said:


> I let mine go long cuz I hate haircuts, then I buzz cut it because it gets to be a pain...is that Godly?


As a two/three hair cut a year person (can't stand em), I don't think so, but watch out for those who whip the ruler out on you to check just how long it is.


----------



## Ron (Aug 30, 2008)

If you're doing it for warmth, it doesn't seem like you have much to worry about. Given your "winters", Average Weather for Pleasanton, CA - Temperature and Precipitation , growing your hair out through the colder months shouldn't result in too long a doo. 

Cheers,

Ron


----------



## Christusregnat (Aug 30, 2008)

tdowns007 said:


> I let mine go long cuz I hate haircuts, then I buzz cut it because it gets to be a pain...is that Godly?



Very, very *UN*-godly!!!


----------



## Christusregnat (Aug 30, 2008)

Ron said:


> If you're doing it for warmth, it doesn't seem like you have much to worry about. Given your "winters", Average Weather for Pleasanton, CA - Temperature and Precipitation , growing your hair out through the colder months shouldn't result in too long a doo.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Ron



Scary how much you can find out about people on the web, huh?

Yeah, our weather is pretty good. Problem is, your body gets used to 70s - 80s, and so 40s - 50s seems reeeeealy cold. Don't believe me? Move to Pleasanton! 

Cheers,


----------



## Ron (Aug 30, 2008)

_"Scary how much you can find out about people on the web, huh?"_

Yea, and from their signature too! _"Adam Brink, Grace Church of Pleasanton, PCA, *Pleasanton*, *California*"_ 

Peace,

Ron


----------



## Christusregnat (Aug 30, 2008)

Ron said:


> _"Scary how much you can find out about people on the web, huh?"_
> 
> Yea, and from their signature too! _"Adam Brink, Grace Church of Pleasanton, PCA, *Pleasanton*, *California*"_
> 
> ...



I was referring to the weather patterns, silly, not to my church's meeting location


----------



## kalawine (Aug 30, 2008)

Contra_Mundum said:


> You know, if virtually EVERY women had WAIST LENGTH hair, then a guy could have hair on his shoulders, and you know what: that's pretty short, just not as short as some others.



Y'know... as obvious as that is, I've never really looked at it that way. I like that answer.


----------



## Zenas (Aug 30, 2008)

All ye who hate hair cuts need to go to a barber.

Not a hair stylist where Gerad the homosexual will try to make you look like him and his buddies, but an old school barber. I get my hair cut by an 80 year old man who primarily uses clippers, fades the sides and back of my head, and uses a straight razor to shave my neck, sideburns, and ear areas. 

My favorite part is the straight razor. 

If you asked that man to style your hair, he'd probably shoot you.


----------



## Christusregnat (Aug 30, 2008)

Zenas said:


> If you asked that man to style your hair, he'd probably shoot you.






What would he do to these guys?







At _least _Owen's looks styled...


----------

