I had a very strange conversation with a friend of mine this evening. He informed me of a contentious struggle over whether or not it was sinful for a guy to have long hair. I wish I were doing one of my goof posts here. 1 Corinthians 14:13-16 seems to be at the heart of this struggle. It would seem impossible to interpret this scripture saying that it was sinful for a man to have long hair - even with just a surface reading! But this is the problem with a mindset that looks at Scripture as a rule book or a history book. It is neither, nor does it claim to be. Does it contain historical elements? Undoubtedly. Does it include rules? Absolutely. Does either of those characteristics define its nature or existence? Not a chance! It is the God of Heaven communicating with us and through us in a beautiful variety of modes and means.
Let's look at this passage: "Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering. If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice - nor do the churches of God." (TNIV) First of all, let it be noted that this is not a passage about hair. Anytime you quote Scripture, you necessarily take it out of context. That said, this is a passage about women covering their heads during worship according to the tradition that Paul taught them. That's right - tradition. Not law, not rule... tradition. (Check 1Cor. 11:1) Paul's discussion about hair is merely illustrative of his broader point that the tradition of women covering their head in worship is a good one. Any reason for this? Well, it comes in the broader discussion of integrating culture and Christianity. And the conclusion Paul makes about head covering is a decision based on culture, not theology. This is not to say, as many do who call Pauline writings cultural and temporal, that the passage says nothing to us. What it clearly says is that we should in all ways conduct and carry ourselves in ways that do not bring dishonor to the name of Christ.
Examine: Is Paul really saying that the great universal human nature teaches us that it is disgraceful for men to have long hair? Actually think about this for two seconds: To believe that would be to believe that global culture for the vast majority of human history has openly defied nature. Short hair on men has historically been a Western phenomenon. It gained in popularity as a Roman military style that made it more difficult for soldiers to be pulled from horses. Corinth, being a city populated by settled soldiers of the Caesar/Pompeiian Civil War, would have followed the dominant Western style culturally. As the West has gained prominence in the world, other cultures have adopted this custom. But this trend is a small slice of life on earth. And if Universal Nature taught us that it was disgraceful to have long hair on men, wouldn't it be somehow more difficult for men to grow long hair? And yet all human hair grows. So Paul's nature here is a cultural one. And an important one. For the people in the church of Corinth, it would be disruptive and disrespectful because of their cultural context.
More: Even if this were not a cultural discussion, where does Paul say that long hair on a man is sinful? I read "dishonoring" (Gk. atimia) to the man, not to God. Or you could even stretch and say that the word "improper" (Gk. prepon) could still apply. Yet these are very different words from "sinful" (Gk. hamartolos). Paul wasn't one to avoid calling sin what it is. So why the different vocabulary if we aren't dealing with something very different?
So riddle me this: How can you possibly read that long hair on men is sinful? You have to be arguing that there is eternal significance to dead cells which are pushed from your head in a biological function over which you have no control. You have to be arguing that John the Baptist - a Nazarite - was in conflict with this decree. You have to believe that someone stranded on a desert isle bereft of razors would become a bit more sinful every day as his hair grew. You have to think that the words "improper" and "sinful" mean the same thing. And you have to believe that the merciful Christ who will separate the sheep from the goats based on what they did for the least of his brothers and sisters will also push a few long-haired sheep over to the goat side even though he never addressed the subject.
Let's be honest with Scripture. Let's not build an entire believe system around one verse. Let's not place cultural preferences - outdated cultural preferences that are only serving to push people away from the church - above the mission of the gospel.