The Beard - Symbol of manhood and token of the superior nature?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Coram Deo

Puritan Board Junior
Early Church Father Clement of Alexandria wrote,

“How womanly it is for one who is a man to comb himself and shave himself with a razor, for the sake of fine effect, and to arrange his hair at the mirror, shave his cheeks, pluck hairs out of them, and smooth them!…For God wished women to be smooth and to rejoice in their locks alone growing spontaneously, as a horse in his mane. But He adorned man like the lions, with a beard, and endowed him as an attribute of manhood, with a hairy chest–a sign of strength and rule.” 2.275

“This, then, is the mark of the man, the beard. By this, he is seen to be a man. It is older than Eve. It is the token of the superior nature….It is therefore unholy to desecrate the symbol of manhood, hairiness.” 2.276

“It is not lawful to pluck out the beard, man’s natural and noble adornment.” 2.277





What does fellow Puritans think of these quotes and the merits of them?
 
Well, I guess the question would be, does it mean any type of beard or does it have to be a full fledged beard.......

Right now, I have a pretty good chin/upper lip beard going on with a long sideburns on each side, but I have to shave an 2 inch area between the chin and the side burn because I have pockets of no hair in between....



Well, seeing as how not all men are endowed with the ability to grow thick, acceptable, beards, I think the quotes are nonsense. It really irks me to see some guy who's incapable of growing a beard try to do it anyway. They're chin looks like teen boy's armpit. Yeck!. But it certainly doesn't bring into question their manhood. That's absurd.

hairy.jpg
 
Hmmm, didn't Bill Gothard teach that beards indicate a lack of humility and were a symbol of rebellion.
 
Early Church Father Clement of Alexandria wrote,

“How womanly it is for one who is a man to comb himself and shave himself with a razor, for the sake of fine effect, and to arrange his hair at the mirror, shave his cheeks, pluck hairs out of them, and smooth them!…For God wished women to be smooth and to rejoice in their locks alone growing spontaneously, as a horse in his mane. But He adorned man like the lions, with a beard, and endowed him as an attribute of manhood, with a hairy chest–a sign of strength and rule.” 2.275

“This, then, is the mark of the man, the beard. By this, he is seen to be a man. It is older than Eve. It is the token of the superior nature….It is therefore unholy to desecrate the symbol of manhood, hairiness.” 2.276

“It is not lawful to pluck out the beard, man’s natural and noble adornment.” 2.277





What does fellow Puritans think of these quotes and the merits of them?

I think we have much better and more important things to be concerned about than whether "true men" have beards.

As for paying much attention to Clement's comments on adiaphora like beardedness, you perhaps can guess my opinion. Token of a superior nature? Get real!
 
Also, who says that a beard HAS to be acceptable. If a man can only grow a teenage arm pit style on his chin :smug: then who am I to say if it is not acceptable..



:cool:
 
Well, seeing as how not all men are endowed with the ability to grow thick, acceptable, beards, I think the quotes are nonsense. It really irks me to see some guy who's incapable of growing a beard try to do it anyway. They're chin looks like teen boy's armpit. Yeck!. But it certainly doesn't bring into question their manhood. That's absurd.

Yeah, that pretty much sounds like me. :( I wish I could grow a beard.

And I agree. The quotes are absurd.
 
"But the embellishment of smoothing (for I am warned by the Word), if it is to attract men, is the act of an effeminate person,—if to attract women, is the act of an adulterer; and both must be driven as far as possible from our society. "But the very hairs of your head are all numbered," says the Lord; those on the chin, too, are numbered, and those on the whole body. There must be therefore no plucking out, contrary to God's appointment, which has counted them in according to His will."

According to Clement any hair removal at all violates providence. Let's face it, he was a 7 point Calvinist.

This is why the other kids wouldn't let him leave his letters in the Bible.
 
"But the embellishment of smoothing (for I am warned by the Word), if it is to attract men, is the act of an effeminate person,—if to attract women, is the act of an adulterer; and both must be driven as far as possible from our society. "But the very hairs of your head are all numbered," says the Lord; those on the chin, too, are numbered, and those on the whole body. There must be therefore no plucking out, contrary to God's appointment, which has counted them in according to His will."

According to Clement any hair removal at all violates providence. Let's face it, he was a 7 point Calvinist.

This is why the other kids wouldn't let him leave his letters in the Bible.

:lol:

All I have is my personal experience. When I had a full bushy beard, store security men would follow me around when I was shopping, and young Jewish kids would come up to me to ask for my understanding of the Torah.
 
Todd,

I am going to politely disagree with you... I am not saying I believe what Clement is saying... I thought it was an interesting quote to discuss... But What I disagree with is saying that whether or not a beard is less important or the implicit underlying (maybe I am wrong how I read it) statement that outward issues are unimportant... But I don't agree that outward issues are unimportant or straining at gnats.. I believe that both inward or internal and outward or external needs to be kept in balance but both are important... Nor do I believe that such topics are a waste of time.. Anything that is in scripture, whether someone thinks they are the smallest of issues are important to discuss, and I believe Clement might be getting some of his understanding from the passage about not shaving the beard... So part of his statement is in the scriptures and worthy to discuss....

Where we come out on the passage is a different matter... I see the beard passage as a type of shadow of new testament realities of sanctification and separation..... Of course I could be wrong and Clement could be right... So I believe it is important to discuss the matters.... So I don't see it as unimportant...

I also have very little love for cultural arguments... If I were to throw away the modesty issue, the headcovering passages, and other token passages that people label cultural aspects I might as well throw out the rest.... It becomes a very slippery slope when you start to label things as cultural....

Again, I am not saying I agree with Clement, but it is a very fascinating Quote and I believe worth discussing....


Early Church Father Clement of Alexandria wrote,

“How womanly it is for one who is a man to comb himself and shave himself with a razor, for the sake of fine effect, and to arrange his hair at the mirror, shave his cheeks, pluck hairs out of them, and smooth them!…For God wished women to be smooth and to rejoice in their locks alone growing spontaneously, as a horse in his mane. But He adorned man like the lions, with a beard, and endowed him as an attribute of manhood, with a hairy chest–a sign of strength and rule.” 2.275

“This, then, is the mark of the man, the beard. By this, he is seen to be a man. It is older than Eve. It is the token of the superior nature….It is therefore unholy to desecrate the symbol of manhood, hairiness.” 2.276

“It is not lawful to pluck out the beard, man’s natural and noble adornment.” 2.277





What does fellow Puritans think of these quotes and the merits of them?

I think we have much better and more important things to be concerned about than whether "true men" have beards.

As for paying much attention to Clement's comments on adiaphora like beardedness, you perhaps can guess my opinion. Token of a superior nature? Get real!
 
:lol:


"But the embellishment of smoothing (for I am warned by the Word), if it is to attract men, is the act of an effeminate person,—if to attract women, is the act of an adulterer; and both must be driven as far as possible from our society. "But the very hairs of your head are all numbered," says the Lord; those on the chin, too, are numbered, and those on the whole body. There must be therefore no plucking out, contrary to God's appointment, which has counted them in according to His will."

According to Clement any hair removal at all violates providence. Let's face it, he was a 7 point Calvinist.

This is why the other kids wouldn't let him leave his letters in the Bible.

:lol:

All I have is my personal experience. When I had a full bushy beard, store security men would follow me around when I was shopping, and young Jewish kids would come up to me to ask for my understanding of the Torah.
 
Agreed, Sorry... Still trying to get moving and mind fogging from little sleep in the night...


Leviticus 19:27

Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard.



Anything that is in scripture, whether someone thinks they are the smallest of issues are important to discuss, and I believe Clement might be getting some of his understanding from the passage about not shaving the beard... So part of his statement is in the scriptures and worthy to discuss....
A citing of this passage to which you refer would have been helpful, Brother. Surely, you're not quoting Clement as the Scripture? ;)
 
Todd,

I am going to politely disagree with you... I am not saying I believe what Clement is saying... I thought it was an interesting quote to discuss... But What I disagree with is saying that whether or not a beard is less important or the implicit underlying (maybe I am wrong how I read it) statement that outward issues are unimportant... But I don't agree that outward issues are unimportant or straining at gnats.. I believe that both inward or internal and outward or external needs to be kept in balance but both are important... Nor do I believe that such topics are a waste of time.. Anything that is in scripture, whether someone thinks they are the smallest of issues are important to discuss, and I believe Clement might be getting some of his understanding from the passage about not shaving the beard... So part of his statement is in the scriptures and worthy to discuss....

Where we come out on the passage is a different matter... I see the beard passage as a type of shadow of new testament realities of sanctification and separation..... Of course I could be wrong and Clement could be right... So I believe it is important to discuss the matters.... So I don't see it as unimportant...

I also have very little love for cultural arguments... If I were to throw away the modesty issue, the headcovering passages, and other token passages that people label cultural aspects I might as well throw out the rest.... It becomes a very slippery slope when you start to label things as cultural....

Again, I am not saying I agree with Clement, but it is a very fascinating Quote and I believe worth discussing....


Early Church Father Clement of Alexandria wrote,

“How womanly it is for one who is a man to comb himself and shave himself with a razor, for the sake of fine effect, and to arrange his hair at the mirror, shave his cheeks, pluck hairs out of them, and smooth them!…For God wished women to be smooth and to rejoice in their locks alone growing spontaneously, as a horse in his mane. But He adorned man like the lions, with a beard, and endowed him as an attribute of manhood, with a hairy chest–a sign of strength and rule.” 2.275

“This, then, is the mark of the man, the beard. By this, he is seen to be a man. It is older than Eve. It is the token of the superior nature….It is therefore unholy to desecrate the symbol of manhood, hairiness.” 2.276

“It is not lawful to pluck out the beard, man’s natural and noble adornment.” 2.277





What does fellow Puritans think of these quotes and the merits of them?

I think we have much better and more important things to be concerned about than whether "true men" have beards.

As for paying much attention to Clement's comments on adiaphora like beardedness, you perhaps can guess my opinion. Token of a superior nature? Get real!

Michael,

When it's not a scriptural argument (and this one isn't) it becomes purely subjective. To you it's important and relevant. To others it's not. It does seem that the consensus of posts in this thread (other than yours) indicates it's not relevant to the majority. That's neither good or bad. It simply, "is what it is."
 
That is what I accept right now, that it is ceremonial law that foreshadowed New Testament realities.. But I could be wrong and Clement could be right....

Just Pondering....


Agreed, Sorry... Still trying to get moving and mind fogging from little sleep in the night...


Leviticus 19:27

Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard.



A citing of this passage to which you refer would have been helpful, Brother. Surely, you're not quoting Clement as the Scripture? ;)
So would this be ceremonial law? No mixing of two different materials? Eating no flesh with blood in it (like my favorite sirloin)?
 
Hmm, my favorite too... "Pittsburg style" Put it on, turn it over, take it off... Hmmmm...

Of course I have not had it that way in while since I have to be more careful with my immune system... Most of my meat has to be cooked done now... :(

Of course, didn't the counsel in Acts say that Gentile believers were to abstain from blood.... :think:



Eating no flesh with blood in it (like my favorite sirloin)?
 
To Clement it was scriptural:

"But the very hairs of your head are all numbered"

However, that is a misapplication of the verse. He's trying to make it walk on all fours and he goes too far. It is a verse about God's omniscience but he uses it as a prooftext about hair.
 
To Clement it was scriptural:

"But the very hairs of your head are all numbered"

However, that is a misapplication of the verse. He's trying to make it walk on all fours and he goes too far. It is a verse about God's omniscience but he uses it as a prooftext about hair.

Spot on, professor Bawb.
 
Of course God intended real men to have beards! Now, hair on top of their heads . . . that's another story. Why would you ask?

McFaddenCloseUp-1.jpg


Actually, I'm with the other old guys in thinking that Clement must have been smoking something when he made that comment.
 
Last edited:
Clement was a Platonist and it this syncretism between Hellenic thought and Christian teaching that you are reading in his quote. (i.e., token of superior nature)
 
I suppose, then, Pastor Lewis, that Jesus and Paul weren't men? :confused:

(I know your post was tongue-in-cheek, right?)

Beautiful family, BTW.

:)

Think again brother!

Gal 4:19 My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,

Eph 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

;)

Blessings!
 
I think, in all honesty, that the principle is still valid of having men look different than women. I don't think it has to be by means of beard, although that is certainly a rather decisive indication of what sex a person is. The point is that men should not look like women.

On a side note, if I shaved my beard off, not only would I look like I'm 16 years old, but my children would be scared to death!
 
Also, who says that a beard HAS to be acceptable. If a man can only grow a teenage arm pit style on his chin then who am I to say if it is not acceptable..

It is determined by the same measure that Clement determined: Subjectivity. Esau was hairy, Jacob was not...was Esau more of a man. Esau liked to hunt, Jacob liked to cook. Does that make Esau more of a man?
 
On a side note, if I shaved my beard off, not only would I look like I'm 16 years old, but my children would be scared to death!

Last time I shaved was when my daughter was about 4, and when I came out of the bathroom I did scare her to death. She cried for the longest time about the "strange man in the house".
 
Last edited:
I suppose, then, Pastor Lewis, that Jesus and Paul weren't men? :confused:

(I know your post was tongue-in-cheek, right?)

Beautiful family, BTW.

:)

Think again brother!

Gal 4:19 My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,

Eph 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

;)

Blessings!
So, what if one is unable to physically have children, and is not called/qualified to raise spiritual children? Does that mean such a one is not a man, albeit due to Providential hindrances? :scratch:

Errr, this is not going the right direction. My post was simple fun, nothing more intended. Of course a man's masculinity is not tied to the number of children he has.
 
Greenbaggins,

I agree with most of what you said.... And you have put into words what I was thinking (Principle is still valid), though I might say that it well could be the beard as one determining factor... To say "I don't think it has to be by means of beard" is like those say that the headcovering principle is the same, but that we use a ring on a finger instead of a headcovering".. I don't accept that argument...

But the point remains, men should not look like women, whether one accept a beard as a factor or not and how one comes out on the passages regarding the beard......

By the way, I agree, I like Gandalf's beard a lot better.... :cool:

I think, in all honesty, that the principle is still valid of having men look different than women. I don't think it has to be by means of beard, although that is certainly a rather decisive indication of what sex a person is. The point is that men should not look like women.

On a side note, if I shaved my beard off, not only would I look like I'm 16 years old, but my children would be scared to death!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top