Shaving Beards Lev 19:27

[AnotherMan]

Hi

Hope this is the correct section of the forum?

Why do we not observe Leviticus 19:27?

No-one has given me a satisfactory answer to this. Your thoughts?

EGW said it is best to be clean shaven for ministry.

[M. T. Cross]

For that matter why do men cut their hair? Same verse.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

I believe this instruction regarding beards and hair was to differentiate the Israelites from the Egyptians and other pagan nations at that time.

Perhaps Ellen White advised men in ministry to be clean shaven so people could tell if they were speaking out of both sides of their mouths...

[AnotherMan]

Why don't Adventists have beards to set them apart nowdays? We can apply the same arguement here.

I really want to get to the bottom of this verse. :)

[Green Cochoa]

EGW said it is best to be clean shaven for ministry.

Where does she say this?

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

[Gregory Matthews]

Why have you selected one verse and ignored much of the rest of the chapter:

Verse 10: Do not harvest your vineyard a second time or pick up the grapes that fell to the ground.

Verse 19: Do not plant two kinds of seed in your field.

Verse 19: Do not wear cloths made of two kinds of material.

Verse 32: Stand in the presence of the aged. NOTE: Please stand in my presence as I am aged.

For some interesting comments on this passage see:

http://www.karaite-korner.org/shaving.shtml

[phkrause]

Great post Gregory. Excellent web-site.

[Kevin H]

Great post Gregory. Excellent web-site.

Yes indeed!!! Shows the difference between studying a text in it's context and just taking the words of the Bible and applying them willy nilly or according to tradition.

[phkrause]

Yes indeed!!! Shows the difference between studying a text in it's context and just taking the words of the Bible and applying them willy nilly or according to tradition.

Exactly

[Green Cochoa]

Why have you selected one verse and ignored much of the rest of the chapter:

Verse 10: Do not harvest your vineyard a second time or pick up the grapes that fell to the ground.

Verse 19: Do not plant two kinds of seed in your field.

Verse 19: Do not wear cloths made of two kinds of material.

Verse 32: Stand in the presence of the aged. NOTE: Please stand in my presence as I am aged.

For some interesting comments on this passage see:

http://www.karaite-korner.org/shaving.shtml

[Gregory Matthews]

For the same reason that I skipped verses 11 - 17.

The major part of my response was in the URL that I posted. I guess that I could ask you why your skipped the major part of my response.

[Gail]

I find it interesting that this topic was started in the "Real Issues in Adventism today" forum

[Tom Wetmore]

Actually, it wasn't. I moved it here for lack of a better idea of where it should go since it didn't quite fit where it came from. If it fits better elsewhere, I am all for moving it again.

[Johann]

Is it difficult to find the right frame for a study?

With this in mind I looked up "beard" in the EGW index where I found 22 references. It seems like the first 21 refer to the beard of Jesus Christ, but then the last one refers to the beard of one of the first preachers of the advent message in Europe.

D. A. Delafield tells the story in his book EGW in Europe from page 138 and on, also of J. P. Malan, Daniel Bourdeau’s most promising convert in Torre Pellice, Northern Italy. When Ellen White came there to preach, Malan demanded a "yes" or "no" answer to the question if the Sabbath was essential to salvation.

Quote:

“She tried five or six times to answer it,” wrote Mary K. White to Willie the next evening, “but he would spring to his feet every time and in a fury of passion demand an answer, ‘yes or no.’”—M. K. White letter, November 29, 1885. {EGWE 141.3}

Ellen White attempted to explain that such an important question called for more than a yes-or-no answer, and in between Malan’s outbursts tried to tell him that if a person had light on the Sabbath he could not be saved while rejecting it. {EGWE 141.4}

Here we see that it is impossible to answer many important questions with a yes-or-no answer, and that such a demand can lead to apostasy.

If this is true of important questions, could it also be true of less important questions, such as if a preacher must be shaved or not?

[Myron]

Are we going back under the Old Covenant now, that we must keep everyone of these laws according to the most minute letter?

Paul tells us in Colossians 2, 16 Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day.(AI) 17 These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ. Other passages make it clear that this principle applies to the entire law, not simply these particular rituals.

Jesus applies this to the entire law when he says in John 5:46, "For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me, for he wrote about Me." In addition Ellen White tells us in a number of different passages that the entire mosaic law is a prophecy of the plan of salvation. She words it various ways as Jewish or Hebrew law or economy. No matter the specific combination of words it always means the same thing. The entire law is prophetic types and shadows and should be studied as such.

This is not to say that the physical application of these laws does not necessarily apply in some way. After all, God chooses his symbols carefully. Murder is still murder, even though under the New Covenant it applies to hate and anything else that diminishes life in any way. Ellen White tells us that the moral law remains in effect but that the ritual law has passed away. I don't agree with her in this because scripture makes it clear she is not correct. Jesus said that not the slightest mark of a pen would pass from the law until it was all fulfilled. Much of it still retains a future fulfillment, thus none of it has passed. Hebrews makes it clear that the rituals remain but with new meanings. We must still take the blood of the true lamb of God into the New Covenant temple and minister that blood on the altars and veil there. We are that New Covenant temple, not made with hands, but made with living stones. The blood of Jesus is to be ministered in us.

I have never studied hair in great detail so I am not completely sure what some of these symbols really mean. Paul does give us a definition of the symbol of hair in 1 Corinthians where he tells us a woman's hair is the glory God has given her (1 Corinthians 11:15). When she is in the sacred service under her husband's (or father's) authority she is to have her hair covered. Yet Paul says it was a disgrace for a man to cover his hair. This is because under these Old Covenant symbolisms the man was under the direct covering of God, or if a freeman he was under the covering of his bond holder. As Christians we are bondsmen to Jesus, who is God. We are under his covering and should have no other. It is a disgrace if we allow ourselves to come under the covering of another.

Since Paul was always so adamant that we are not to go back to the Old Covenant why was he stressing these symbols so strongly in this book? The answer is given back in chapters 2 and 3

Quote:

13 This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual realities with Spirit-taught words. 14 The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit. 15 The person with the Spirit makes judgments about all things, but such a person is not subject to merely human judgments, 16 for,

“Who has known the mind of the Lord

so as to instruct him?”

But we have the mind of Christ.

3 Brothers and sisters, I could not address you as people who live by the Spirit but as people who are still worldly—mere infants in Christ. 2 I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready. 3 You are still worldly. For since there is jealousy and quarreling among you, are you not worldly? Are you not acting like mere humans? 4 For when one says, “I follow Paul,” and another, “I follow Apollos,” are you not mere human beings?

The spirit of denominationalism was the primary, but not only, thing Paul points to here to show that these people were not spiritual and that they must, therefore, still be taught using the physical things which can be seen, rather than the spiritual things which remained unseen. Spiritual things can only be discerned by spiritual means and these people were not spiritual, but fleshly only.

We claim to be spiritual, but this denomination suffers heavily from the same sin of denominationalism, so it is likely that we also must keep the physical forms of these laws until such time as we become spiritual, so I won't fuss too much that some of you are making such a big deal of physical forms of these laws in this thread. Yet you must still be aware of the spiritual applications, learn them and apply them as soon as you are able to see them.

The long bushy beards and long hair that were so common in the 19th Century were not lawful, at least for pastors, even for those limited to keeping the physical applications of the law. The New Covenant temple and its services are discussed at length beginning in Ezekiel 40. In chapter 44 of the priest we read, "They must not shave their heads or let their hair grow long, but they are to keep the hair of their heads trimmed." The regulations here are essentially the same as those you will find in the writings of Moses, so there is not likely to be much, if anything here that did not also apply to the levitical priests, even though they are not found in the Torah. I am not able to find such a restriction right now, but I thought I had read somewhere that their beards were also supposed to be short.

Trimming the corners of their beards may apply to morning as the Karaite Korner claims, but spiritually it has another meaning as well, and it does apply to general grooming. Along the corners and edges there are wild hairs that are often trimmed for appearances sake. However, when the hair, whether beard or scalp hair, is seen as God's covering for us these wild hairs take on a new meaning.

There are many things God says about himself in scripture that do not fit into the smooth, unbroken picture we have of God. Where we see these things it is normal for us to say, "That is not what that really means," instead of taking scripture in its plain language. When God tells us 11 times that he will or did harden Pharaoh's heart we are not to explain that away claiming God would never do that. If we do we are trimming the corners of our beards and sides of our heads. We are trimming away portions of God's covering over us. The same is true when we are told that Samson's marriage to the Timnite woman was from God. We are not to bemoan how Samson sinned by not marrying an Israelite woman (a doctrine that is not biblical, by the way; we get it by taking half of what scripture says and ignoring the other half that seems contradictory.)

It would be better if we did not need to focus so closely on the physical, rather than spiritual, applications of God's law. Paul tells us, "We know the law is spiritual," so we know we are to focus on its spiritual application if we have learned to see spiritually, even in part. Barring ability to see spiritually it would be better if we focus on the physical application of the moral laws and not get too hung up on why we are not keeping a law that is purely ritual in its physical application.

[AnotherMan]

Originally Posted By: AnotherMan

EGW said it is best to be clean shaven for ministry.

Where does she say this?

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

I am not sure, a friend quoted it to me.

[Gail]

Have you seen some of the beards the men of her day had? It's understandable why she said that!

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

Yes indeed!!! Shows the difference between studying a text in it's context and just taking the words of the Bible and applying them willy nilly or according to tradition.

And it also serves the purpose of causing one to realize why salvation is a result of accepting the righteousness of Jesus Christ as our only hope for redemption.

Jesus/God saves!

[Gregory Matthews]

My comment is not related to LHC.

We are living in End Time. The marching orders that we have been given are contained in the Three Angels Messages, as well at those given by Christ to his followers.

We are facing a secular world that either knows nothing of Christ, or only knows of Him in a superficial manner. We can no longer depend upon working with people who have any basic understanding of what it means to be Christian.

So, in this time of crisis, we want to debate beards!

No wonder our family members are often telling us that we have noting to offer.

[phkrause]

I agree Gregory. Sometimes I wonder how Satan must smile as we argue about things that keep us from the commission that Jesus gave us to spread the good news!

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

I wasn't aware that every topic in the forum needed to focus on a salvational issue. Nor was I aware that the only reason (while albeit the *best* reason) for the existence of the forum was to "spread the good news"....

how does sharing one's milestones in life, or obituaries, or photos of pets or wildlife or injuries or office knick-knacks further the sharing of the good news? How does talking about one's family issues, or giving minute-by-minute sports scores further the cause of the good news?

I was under the assumption that welcomed topics included not only theological "salvational" issues, but also such items of interest as above.

If Jesus had walked around *only* spewing out theological data and texts, and never included core topics common to humans (e.g. death, work, weddings, animals), He would never have reached the people who really needed Him.

If someone is interested in whether men should wear beards or be clean-shaven, why should the question not be posed in a C/A forum?

(not trying to start an argument - just commenting on my perspective regarding the last two posts in this thread)

[CoAspen]

My first non answer is....Real Issues in Adventism today. Is it one, how, why and when?

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

My first non answer is....Real Issues in Adventism today. Is it one, how, why and when?

In the opening post, it was written, "Hope this is the correct section of the forum?"

If it was not in the correct spot, it most assuredly could have been moved to a more appropriate forum.

While it was obviously a topic the thread author wanted to pursue, it wasn't a "real issue" to me, because, barring some unforeseeable future hormone malfunction, I'll never have a beard.

[CoAspen]

So....the ladies are excluded from the discussion!

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

okay