Monday, November 14, 2011

Did Jesus Have Long Hair?

Here's an article on the forensic work to discover the 'real face' of Jesus. The scientist in question works to build up a face from a typical first century Palestinian Jew. He does not refer to the Shroud of Turin and says the reason the Shroud is a fake is because it shows Jesus to have long hair and St Paul says, "For a man to have long hair is a shame." (I Cor.11:14)

So that settles it? If only the forensic scientist did a bit more homework he would be familiar with the Jewish Nazarite tradition in which a Jew would make a religious vow not avoid corpses, abstain from wine and to not cut his hair. Samson in the Old Testament was a Nazarite and John the Baptist was a Nazarite from birth. A Jew would take a Nazarite vow for at least thirty days, and could renew that vow as often as he wished. At the end of the vow time period he would be immersed in water and make certain sacrifices at the temple. Remember that Jesus is referred to not just as 'from Nazareth' but also as a 'Nazarene', and scholars have long argued whether the name is just a reference to his home town or whether it is also a reference to his status as a Nazarite brother.

So did Jesus have long hair--as is shown in the shroud? His cousin John was a Nazarite, and Jesus was following very much in the prophetic tradition, so it is very likely that he did have long hair, and that this was a sign of his role as a holy man and teacher. Jesus was blamed for being a 'wine bibber'. (Mt.11:19) so does that mean that he never too the Nazarite vow, or that he was being blamed for breaking it? It could go both ways.

One of the marks of Jesus' ministry is that he fulfilled the whole Jewish law from the inside out. He fulfilled the law, but he broke some of the rules. We see him gathering corn on the Sabbath with his disciples and annoying the Pharisees. He broke some of the dietary and cleansing rules and justified himself. Most of all, he broke the individual laws by bursting them with true freedom. Does the fact that Jesus ministered to dead people also show that he was not a Nazarite? (they were forbidden from being under the same roof with a corpse) or the fact that he raised them from the dead show that he was fulfilling the Nazarite vow from the inside out?

Enough minutiae. It's my opinion that Jesus, like his cousin John the Baptist, took the Nazarite vow, and kept it strictly for the appointed time, and that he maintained the Nazarite rule of life informally in identification with his cousin John, and the tradition of the prophets, and that therefore, yes, he had long hair.

6 comments:

  1. St. Paul wasn't referring to Jewish practice anyway. He was writing to the Corinthians, whose cultural context was quite different. So his comment about long hair really doesn't tell us much (if anything) about the length of Jesus's hair.

    This is independent of one's stance on the Shroud of Turin. For that matter, it's also independent of one's stance on the iconographic tradition, which generally shows Jesus with long hair.

    Furthermore, if I understand the article correctly, the guy simply isn't reconstructing the face of Jesus. He's attempting to reconstruct the face of a typical ("average", in some sense) first-century Jew living in Judea. Since we have no particular reason to think that Jesus was (or wasn't) physically average in any interesting sense, this is no more
    a representation of Jesus than a construction of a typical present-day American male would be a representation of President Obama. (Or Fr. Dwight. Or me.)

    Peace,
    --Peter

    ReplyDelete
  2. At the risk of sounding a tad bit snarky, if Jesus looked like the picture in the article, His disciples might have felt a profound dismay and letdown when Jesus told them, “If you have seen me, you have seen the Father.” I’ve always wondered if Gabriel’s words to Mary, “you will be overshadowed by the Holy Ghost” altered Jesus’ physical appearance from His contemporary Jews.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think it is also unlikely that shoulder length hair really counted as long hair for a man back then. Women were more sensible back then, and likely had hair near their waist. Largely due to the changes in women's hairstyles, we seem to be calling anything you can get into a ponytail long, and that doesn't really make any sense.
    I am highly biased on this subject.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Halfway down the back is long hair. Hair to the waist is hair that is getting to be a responsibility heavier than is useful. Anything longer than that, structural problems both with hair tensile strength and the weight of it start to ensue.

    Of course, if you're only four foot high in the first place, having hair to the waist is a lot easier to achieve. If you're over five foot six, it gets to be a lot more difficult.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I remember as a grade school kid visiting my cousin's church. In their Sunday School books, Jesus looked like Clint Eastwood. I was pretty sure they were wrong. I understand now that artists and illustrators depict Jesus in a form familiar to them, although it makes the image hard for some to recognize - as was the case in my youth. Even if he was depicted bald and mustachioed it is still only his temporal body and not his eternal form (what ever that may be).
    Mark

    ReplyDelete
  6. Frankly, ANY hair would do for me these days...

    ReplyDelete