Sunday, February 5, 2012

A Response to Facial Hair: A Christian Perspective by Chancy Gore Part 2 (Chapter 1)



CHAPTER 1

Ancient Shaving was for Cleanliness
Alongside those who placed an intense value and importance on the beard, the Egyptians, Greeks and Romans were quite the opposite.  The Egyptians associated cleanliness with being shaven.  Reynolds, in his book on beards, records that at times “the Egyptians shaved the whole body, from motives of cleanliness, which in all great religions (save one) has had, from the beginning some association with holiness.””  One source listed that “the intense love for cleanliness on the part of the Egyptians would not suffer them to wear a beard, save according to Herodotus, in times of morning.” Shaving was a matter of religion to the Egyptian.” Pg. 15-16

Just on the surface it seems strange to me that an argument would be made for shaving from the Egyptians.  I can’t imagine another issue that the Author would appeal to Egyptian thought as a basis for Christian practice.  The title of the book is Facial Hair: A Christian Perspective, not Facial Hair: A Pagan Perspective.  I do not care what the Egyptians, Greeks or Romans thought or practiced concerning facial hair.  Does Gore carry out this logic and say that Aaron was unclean (Psalms 133), or the many OT prophets who wore facial hair?  Evidently the Jews did not view facial hair as being unclean.

            The Beard Of The Jews
Through a close study of historical facts and customs, it is concluded that the Jews still maintained their beards while in Egyptian bondage.  Although the Egyptians generally compelled their slaves to shave, somehow the Israelites apparently did not conform to this during their slavery. “From the above facts, it is clear the Israelites maintained their beard…during their abode with the Egyptians, who were a shaven people.  This is not unimportant as one of the indicators which evidence that whatever they learned of good and evil in that country, they preserved the appearance and habits of a separated people””

There are a number of interesting points to be made here: 1. The Jews thought the beard important enough to maintain it in a shaven culture.  They refused to shave even in the subordinate position of slavery. 2. Point 1 seems to indicate that the beard to the Jew was not a matter of mere preference. 3. It seems strange that the author would argue that the Jews having facial hair in a shaven culture demonstrated that they were a holy and separated people; yet later in the book are that we should not have facial hair because we live in a culture that prefers the shaven.[1]  This is truly an attempt for Gore to have his beard and shave it too.

Facial Hair In New Testament Times
The expanding social force of Hellenism (Grecian culture) began to subtly lure the Jew into its life of seeming ease and comfort.  When Alexander the Great was overlord of Palestine he showed great friendship for the Jews.  Alexander was a student of Aristotle, and adopted many of his liberal social philosophies.  In 332 B.C., when he established the city of Alexandra in Egypt, he cordially invited the Jews of Judea to come and live there.  The Dynamic Hellenistic empire had a magnetic attraction for many Jews who left their homeland of Jerusalem to settle in Alexandria.  It is ironic that even though a thousand years had passed by since God delivered the Jews from Egyptian bondage (which was bondage of forced slavery), many of their descendants would turn back to this same country only to end up in social and cultural bondage. Alexandrian culture seeped into the Jewish population until the term “Hellenist” aptly described a Greek-speaking Jew.  Thus a Hellenistic Jew was a Greek-influenced, Greek-speaking, and Greek-thinking Jew.  They could be compared to “worldly and carnal” Christians today.  They were Jews by birth, yet Greek by lifestyles and customs…Jews soon believed, dressed, acted, spoke, and looked like Greeks…After the death of Alexander, Jerusalem eventually came under the dominion of the Roman empire.  This resulted in turning Jerusalem into a city-state dominated by the Romans.  Such was the scene and environment that set the stage for the birth of Jesus Christ, Messiah and Savior of the world. There is no doubt that Hellenism continued to influence the lives of the Jews even after Jesus was born in the New Testament times.  It is evident that the ugly spirit behind Hellenism is still alive today.  Only this time it comes with a different mark and the name of worldliness... 
Shaving Becomes Characteristic Of Christians
The Roman Empire controlled Judea and all of Palestine in the time of Christ.  The Romans preferred the clean shaven look and short cropped hair.  There is substantial evidence that many of the Jews adopted this Roman custom.  One source mentions that “The cosmopolitan Jew probably was clean-shaven in the Roman manner.”  Since the first Christians were of Jewish stock, it follows that the early Christians were also clean shaven.” Pg. 20-22

Gore makes the curious point that Hellenism, the modern day spirit of compromise, caused the Jews to give up their Jewish culture and become Hellenized (liberal or worldly).  It was the continued influences of Hellenism in the Jewish culture during the Roman control of Jerusalem and beyond that caused them to acquiesce to the Roman culture of being clean shaven.  Gore quotes a source saying the “cosmopolitan Jew was clean-shaven in the Roman manner.”  The cosmopolitan Jew was the Hellenized Jew.  Then he draws the conclusion that because the first Christians were Jews, then the first Christians must have been shaven.  Since the first century Christians was shaven, being shaven is a mark of being Christian.

This is a convolution of logical contradictions.  Notice the progression: 1. Jews compromised and became Hellenized. 2. The Hellenized (cosmopolitan) Jews began to shave like the Romans. 3. They remained Hellenized (worldly, compromise) until the church was founded. 4. Because the Hellenized (worldly, compromiser) Jews shaved and were converted to Christianity, shaving becomes Christian. 

How does one go from Jews shaved because they were worldly and compromising to shaving is a mark of being a Christian because the compromisers who converted did?  You cannot call the root comprise and then turn around and call its fruit holiness.

Many of the Jews who converted to Christianity were not cosmopolitan Jews, many of them were devout, orthodox Jews.
POINTS OF INTEREST

·         The author admits that the Jews trimmed their beards (Pg. 14, Para. 2).

·         The author admits that the Jews and idolatrous heathen had facial hair concurrently and that a distinction in style, not shaven versus unshaven, was all that was necessary to maintain a mark of separation (Pg. 19, Para. 3).  Interesting confession in light of the purpose of this book, which is to argue that Christian should shave.

The author argues on Pg. 18-19 that Jews not shaving while in Egyptian (a shaven culture) slavery made them a “separated people;” however, Christian Jews shaving while under the empirical control of Rome (a shaven culture) was “characteristically Christian (Pg. 22, Para. 2).”


[1] Beards and the Business World, Pg. 45-47 

Saturday, February 4, 2012

A Response to Facial Hair: A Christian Perspective by L. Chancy Gore Part 1 (Forward)



Forward
“The Bible deals primarily with principles (such as describing worldliness as “the lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh, and the pride of life”) and generally leaves the application to the teaching ministry in each generation.  We are given the Holy Spirit and godly leadership to guide us through the maze of social ills and ethical challenges of this twilight age.  We are sometimes required to make moral judgments on matters our forefathers never confronted” Pg. 5

While the Bible does deal with principles, God also communicates with razor sharp (pun intended) specificity in essential matters.  All one has to do to see the specificity of God is to do a cursory reading of the tabernacle plan and the prescription for priestly service; God knows how to get his point across. 

“The lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh, and the pride of life,” when taken in isolation, can be used by anyone to apply to anything that they do not like.  Many fringe Apostolics have used these similar type arguments to preach against deodorant, women shaving their legs, hair spray, neckties, suits and a myriad of other things that our brethren (Ensey and Gore) would say is crossing the line.  We must be careful in our use of “blank check” type passages to prove our points.  Certainly our brethren would agree that a verse of this nature would have its limitations.

I agree that the Holy Spirit, as well as godly leadership, should be consulted in these matters.  However, when we reach the place, as we have, in the Apostolic movement that those who allow facial hair are rejected for not giving godly leadership then we have misunderstood the Holy Spirit, and have abused our authority as ministers of the gospel.  I could cite two very specific examples; however, I will just refer in general to the frequency with which we disfellowship the brother who tolerates facial hair.

Elder Ensey states above: “We are sometimes required to make moral judgments on matters our forefathers never confronted.”  We certainly do have to make judgment calls on contemporary issues; however to refer to those decision, specifically in the context of facial hair, as “moral judgments” is to dramatically over emphasize the importance of this issue.  It is this kind of rhetoric that has led to this issue being canonized.  What I would call a “moral judgment” concerning a contemporary issue that must be made is to cast off the racism-based hatred that still opposes interracial marriage[1] in the majority of conservative Apostolic churches.  We should be free to make a moral judgment in this matter. 

“In Peter’s Pentecostal message, he implored his hearers to “save [themselves] from this untoward (unseemly, improper, unruly) generation” (Acts 2:40).  Paul admonishes the Corinthians to separate themselves from ungodly influences, practices, and customs (II Corinthians 6:14-17) because “the fashion of this world…passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth forever” (1 Corinthian 7:31; 1 John 2:17).  It might be that a justifiable application of these principles would preclude the wearing of facial hair in contemporary American culture, especially as a fashion statement political expression, or as a symbol of masculine pride.” Pg. 5-6

Save yourself from this untoward generation.  Which part should we save ourselves from?  Is something sinful just because a particular worldly generation does it? No, all generations wear clothing.  What determines whether or not a particular activity by a generation is untoward is scripture.  There is nothing that is untoward, unseemly, improper or unruly about facial hair alone.  What is ungodly about the practice or custom of facial hair?  It cannot be deemed ungodly since all admit that men of God in the Bible had facial hair. 

To perfectly illustrate my point that facial hair in contemporary American culture (circa 1960 to present) is not untoward, unseemly, improper or unruly I offer two examples: The Jews and the Amish.  For the duration of the opposition to facial hair by Apostolics these two demographics of people have continued to wear facial hair without bearing any of the antigovernment, sexual revolution or negative societal stigmas.  It was more than facial hair that was stigmatic: it was facial hair together with long hair, a style of dress, pot smoking, hippie vernacular and sexual promiscuity.  You could tell by the dress and lifestyle of both the Amish and the Jew that they were not included in the ideology and lifestyle of the hippie movement.

Using “the fashion of this world passeth away” in 1 Corinthians 7:31 to refer to the worldly fashion of facial hair or anything other fashion statement (shoes, clothes, ect…) is to abuse the context of this passage.  The fashion of this world that passeth away has apocalyptic implications: firstly to the change in the order of things that occurred in the destruction of Jerusalem and ultimately in the second coming and resurrection (II Peter 3:10-13).  The ESV says it better: “the present form of this world” (I Corinthians 7:31).

“It might be that a justifiable application of these principles would preclude the wearing of facial hair in contemporary American culture…”  Should we not have more than “it might be” before we begin to separate fellowship, impugn a brother and divide the body of Christ.

“We all know that there is no scripture specifically denouncing an unshaven face, but neither is there any decrying the practice of smoking tobacco or taking drugs.  Broad principles have to be conscientiously applied.  It is wise to listen carefully to godly, watchful pastors who are aware of practices or customs which might damage our testimony or identify of with worldly elements of our generation.” Pg. 6

How can one not see the fundamental difference between facial hair and the other issues mentioned?  It is not that the Bible just does not denounce an unshaven face, it condones unshaven faces.  How many verses of scripture do we have to cite to demonstrate that holy men of God had facial hair?  That is the distinction that was obviously overlooked.  There could be no verse that denounces facial hair when it is obvious that God approved.

“This timely work done by L.C. Gore is commendable.  His research is exhaustive and his presentation of facts is fair.  It will be of great assistance in approaching this matter with better understanding and insight.” Pg. 6

The research is far from exhaustive, and the presentation of facts is far from fair.  The research is limited and the facts have been carefully trimmed and groomed to adorn the author’s prima facie.  It certainly has been of great assistance in giving me better understanding and insight; I am more convinced than ever there is no valid reason for the prohibition of facial hair.


[1] Interracial marriage among humans is impossibility.  There is only one race, the human race.  If you accept the Genesis account of man’s origins then you must accept that all mankind share in common Adam and Eve as ancestral parents; therefore, we are all one race.

Closet Progressive

Confessions of a closet progressive.