Flat Earth ,Hair and Genitalia :>)

This thread was recently inspired by a podcast I listened to by DR. Michael Heiser on the subject of the head covering in 1st Corinthians 11:13-15 . " 1Co 11:13 Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?
1Co 11:14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?
1Co 11:15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.

Studying this subject is not quiet as simple as it should be and may be why we see the differing opinions offered in the different churches . As far as I know ,I have never heard a reasonable explanation ,that was until I listened to Heisers talk . It is one of the craziest and most bizarre things I had ever heard and one that makes the most sense .

To add to the ambiguity of the subject we get these prior verses "1Co 11:5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.
1Co 11:6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.

Dr. Heiser emphasises the importance of context and getting into both the authors heads and the people of their time .Remember that the books of the Bible were written for us today but were not written to us .Its easy to see that lots of ancient cultures viewed the earth as being flat and with a dome over it .Times have changed sinse then and people look at it differently today . But if the we were to imagine the earth as being flat then what might it look like ?

Fortunately we have a few flat earth models to choose from and some of them are better than others to picture in our mind . Its True that they may all be not true but they could actually be beneficial to getting into the ancient's mind set .

So let's look at where we get our world views and how world views may change over time and how ancient text is left in the context of its time but we are not .



Aristotle 384–322 BC , Greek doctor Archagathus in 219 BC Aelius Galenus or Claudius Galenus He became an expert on the human anatomy from dissecting animals, including monkeys in Greece. en.wikipedia.org... and Hippocrates of Kos 460 – c. 370 BC were giants of their day and had much influence on society at the time and for many students of which was to come .



Roman medicine was highly influenced by the Greek medical tradition. Similar to Greek physicians, Roman physicians relied on naturalistic observations to heal the sick rather than spiritual rituals, but that does not imply an absence of spiritual belief. en.wikipedia.org...

There is an ancient description of a doctor conducting a simple test to see if or what may be the problem with a woman not being able to get pregnant .The test is quite simple in that a scented vaginal suppository is put in place and the next day the good doctor is required to smell the woman's breath .The reason for this is because at the time they believed that there were tubes running from the vagina up to the brain and that the brain played a very important roll in getting pregnant .

But the hair was also very important .It was believed that the hair was hollow and actually created a vacuum that helped draw the sperm up to the brain . I hear you laughing lol :>) I was busting a gut myself . .Because of this belief at the time the hair was considered genitalia .And so displaying your genitalia in the open and especially when in public prayer was considered lewd .

Now before we jump on the stupid Christians for such a belief at the time we also have to consider the source for that belief as well in sharing the ridicule . We might also want to blame the God of the Bible for not creating a scientific document but if we do that then we would not have any sense of wonder and challenge to discover things for our selves .There would be no need to study and research and ponder about the unknown . Man has a large brain that marks him out as being different from other animals .Man has better adaptive skills because he has a higher capacity to think and create .

This is the link to the podcast . www.nakedbiblepodcast.com... Dr. Heiiser can provide the links to the original papers that he got this take on the head covering . I have not checked the sources out myself but trust the good doctor and am willing to throw my hat behind him :>)

a reply to: the2ofusr1

1Co 11:14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?

What about a lions or stallions mane?

What about Samson?

a reply to: intrptr

What about a lions or stallions mane?

What about Samson?

So, what about them ? I was hoping that you might have added either a bit of humour with those questions or at least created a thread to another way of looking at the horse which doesn't seem to have any shame in displaying his genitalia :>) I wonder if anyone has ever told the horse not to do that ?

a reply to: the2ofusr1

There's a couple of horses near the dog park around here, and I tell them every day to hide their shame. D:

so...was getting a hair cut considered a vasectomy back then?

a reply to: the2ofusr1

«Paul» was an schmock. His name was Saul and he came from Tarsos. He didn't acquire the Paulus name until he had blinded the son of Jesus and healed him in return for Sergius Paulus' surname. The Paulus family had a long history in the courts and senate of Rome, and Elimas Barjesus' (last name means «Son of Jesus») best friend was a Roman official named Paulus, so for Saul it meant status and would be useful in his search for pure hearts he could destroy. Saul could rename himself Paul through extortion and foul play. Probably a bet of some kind, Saul claiming he could make st. Elimas blind and then cure him again, like necromancy only with the eyes and vision. Good old methanol-ethanol poisoning. The same trick Jesus used on Saulus on his way to Damascus. So, what does Paulus do when Jesus blinds him? Well, story goes Saulus blinded the son of Jesus in revenge. Saulus is the Devil. Honestly.

Looks like the Magus and the Roman played along, and the next day Saul was named Paulus. He managed to have all the saints thrown to Hell while he himself ran away to Spain where he died— in what I hope for his own chances in hell— was agony and remorse. Saulus was a predator preying on the early Christians, a widow-maker who managed to have Peter and the others go heaven-wise. He held the spotlight right at them and pulled them up in the arenas, force them to walk along the extra mile, playing the Roman citizen card wherever he went, he turned the early saints into martyrs and something they'd all'd been better off not being. Built his church on deceit and blood of saints and prophets, that's why Jesus gave the Paulians blood to drink as if it was water. Saulus makes me sick. Honestly. There is ONE man to blame for all the horrors of the 1st century AD— Saulus «saint Paul».

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

Looks like something you might like to create a thread about and have a discussion about with others . This thread is about flat earth ,hair ,and genitalia .

a reply to: autopat51

Good question ,and if one looks at the hair as playing such a important role in reproduction then the more vacume a woman had and the less a man had it could have been though so .

a reply to: Necrobile

A electrical prod mike work better then just trying to reason with the beast . A bit cruel but would or should result in something :>)

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: Utnapisjtim

Looks like something you might like to create a thread about and have a discussion about with others . This thread is about flat earth ,hair ,and genitalia .

Who wrote and holds center stage in 1st Corinthians from which you quote so extensively?

Saulus.

People deserves to know who their «saint» was and what sort of murderous bastard he was with all his engines. Saulus was a violent sexist psychopath. And to this day, so are many of his followers.

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

Who wrote and holds center stage in 1st Corinthians from which you quote so extensively?

Saulus.

People deserves to know who their «saint» was and what sort of murderous bastard he was with all his engines. Saulus was a violent sexist psychopath. And to this day, so are many of his followers.

First off I would suggest that Jesus Christ holds centre stage within the whole Bible .Next if you feel the need to tell people about who ,what ,when,where and the why's of Paul then start your own thread on the subject .This thread is about flat earth ,hair, and genitalia .

a reply to: the2ofusr1
I was intrigued by the title of your thread. Thanks for the interesting information.

I have always wondered why, in some time periods, long hair in men was not only considered acceptable, but the height of fashion. The powdered wigs of the 18th Century come to mind.

On the other hand, modern interpretation by some fundamentalists is that long hair in men is a sin.

But the main thing that drew my attention to this thread was the mention of hair and genitalia in the same sentence. In addition to viewing head hair as a form of genitalia, did Dr. Heiser have any opinion of the ancient's view of those items when they are colocated in the more "conventional" areas?


-dex

a reply to: DexterRiley

Dr. Heiser got the info from another scholars research .The main data is from sources that were what could be considered scholars . Manuscripts describing medical procedures and the main philosophy of the day and what was probably more of a consensus of opinions . I am not sure when hair took on the genitalia status but it was widely believed in the Roman Empire in the first century . There may be some journals that have a study in the historic development and Heisers main source may be the go to guy on that .

Most Churches of today do have a historic attitude towards hair and hats or head coverings but for me it has always had little explanatory power to be completely convinced from scripture. The Bible does clearly say that a man should shave while the woman should cover their hair . Paul adds another qualifier for the woman when he mentions because of the Angels . Paul may have been thinking back to Genesis 6 and might have considered that because of that that the women should keep the (hair) genitalia covered .

a reply to: the2ofusr1

I am not sure when hair took on the genitalia status but it was widely believed in the Roman Empire in the first century

That's interesting. I was under the impression that the Romans were very much against any form of body hair, other than head hair. Didn't they have people whose specific profession was hair removal?

-dex

a reply to: DexterRiley

It would make sense that removing mans hair would reduce the amount of vacuum his body had and could end up being more fertile .Long hair on a man might suggest that he wasn't interested in making babies . Sort of a bachelor status maybe .

In the New Testament, doesn't Paul write that men should not pray with their heads covered?

Slighty off-topic because it isn't to do with Christianity, but in India, it was believed that hair is unclean, and that it's similar to stool, which is why so many sects shave their heads. However, it is noted that yogis would keep long hair and topknots, because they believed that it stored vital energy. Some traditions shave all the hair except for a lock at the base of the skull (bindu chakra). The lock is known as a shikha. The yogis also believe that, through celibacy, semen (or the vital essence) travels up the subtle channels in the spine (shushumna nadi). It was believed that it took 12 years of celibacy for the semen to reach the brain and culminate in enlightenment.

a reply to: Darmok

Well that is a interesting take on it .Its not a subject (hair) that I was specifically interested in but find the way cultures unrelated could have similar takes on the human body . The semen brain connection is one but with slightly different takes on it . Unavailing just exactly what Paul was thinking and the part about the head covering of a male is something I still don't have a clear picture of .

I have been over the past few days trying to think in those sorts of terms of understanding to get the larger picture .Thanks once again for your contribution .

a reply to: the2ofusr1

It seems that my link in the OP is broken for the podcast Its episode # 85 www.nakedbiblepodcast.com...

And as for flat earth, only way we know they had to see the Earth was a world map. Only kings and their closest subjects had access to such maps. Take the example from Revelation where it says that four angels holds back the winds in the four corners of the Earth. It's a subtle way of saying they are outside and need four weights for each corner of the map to stop the winds from catching the map. or perhaps it was so huge they needed four morningstars to stand in each corner. Those who complain about dogma and reading things literally in regards to the Bible, they are often the most dogmatic and literal-reading people you stumble upon.