"Beards are sin!" False doctrine?

[Amanah]

Brother Aaron, are you saying that growing a beard will cause the following effect:

"But it will also affect bone density, deepening of voice, increase in the size of the adam's apple, shoulder width, give a man a healthy libido (to be used in the confines of the undefiled marriage bed), greater physical strength, and etc."

Or am I misunderstanding you?

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Amanah

Brother Aaron, are you saying that growing a beard will cause the following effect:

"But it will also affect bone density, deepening of voice, increase in the size of the adam's apple, shoulder width, give a man a healthy libido (to be used in the confines of the undefiled marriage bed), greater physical strength, and etc."

Or am I misunderstanding you?

No, Sister. I am saying that testosterone plays the key role in all of that happening, and part of making sure a man has a healthy level of testosterone is having the ability to grow facial hair. Apart from an injury, some other genetic defect, or ethnic reason, if a man cannot grow facial hair, his levels of testosterone, and in particular, DHT, are low. And low levels of testosterone lead to deficiencies in every other area of a man's life. Look up male androgens and hormonal balance for men.

The very fabric of male DNA is being deleted from the male population of our nation. And it's spiritual. And it needs to be resisted.

However, if a man has stubble coming in regularly but doesn't like or want it, and wants to remove it from his face, go for it. It's his choice. That's not a testosterone issue. But look at the young eighteen year old of today. Where is his facial hair? Does he even have any? Or does he have to borrow it from dad like he does dad's car?

Sis, I know you see it. Men are everywhere degraded in our society and culture. It ought not to be in the church. The culture of our nation degrades women just as much, and screams at Christian women who want to stay home, raise a family, be a helper and not a leader, and etc., and we say that the church must stand up against this onslaught on Biblical women-hood. As well we should. But we must stand up and say the same things regarding this onslaught on Biblical man-hood.

And one of the best ways to do that is to let go of the idea that the head of every man is Christ, but this other guy, too, and the head of every woman is the man, but this other guy, too. And one of the best ways of letting that go, is to stop enforcing a facial hair standard on men. It is all connected.

[Tithesmeister]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

No, Sister. I am saying that testosterone plays the key role in all of that happening, and part of making sure a man has a healthy level of testosterone is having the ability to grow facial hair. Apart from an injury, some other genetic defect, or ethnic reason, if a man cannot grow facial hair, his levels of testosterone, and in particular, DHT, are low. And low levels of testosterone lead to deficiencies in every other area of a man's life. Look up male androgens and hormonal balance for men.

The very fabric of male DNA is being deleted from the male population of our nation. And it's spiritual. And it needs to be resisted.

However, if a man has stubble coming in regularly but doesn't like or want it, and wants to remove it from his face, go for it. It's his choice. That's not a testosterone issue. But look at the young eighteen year old of today. Where is his facial hair? Does he even have any? Or does he have to borrow it from dad like he does dad's car?

Sis, I know you see it. Men are everywhere degraded in our society and culture. It ought not to be in the church. The culture of our nation degrades women just as much, and screams at Christian women who want to stay home, raise a family, be a helper and not a leader, and etc., and we say that the church must stand up against this onslaught on Biblical women-hood. As well we should. But we must stand up and say the same things regarding this onslaught on Biblical man-hood.

Votive Soul,

I was planning to make a post along these very lines. I was not at my computer and did not want to try to post so much content on my phone. I am SO GLAD that you beat me to the draw on this one, because I could have no way articulated as effectively as you have. I am going to try to reinforce what you have stated. I apologize in advance for diluting your message in any way. Here goes.

I thought I was the only one who could see what you describe in your post. When you speak of David's servants having their beards half shaven . . . Allow me to expound on that.

Bible, King James Version

2Sam.10 Verses 1 to 5

[1] And it came to pass after this, that the king of the children of Ammon died, and Hanun his son reigned in his stead.
[2] Then said David, I will shew kindness unto Hanun the son of Nahash, as his father shewed kindness unto me. And David sent to comfort him by the hand of his servants for his father. And David's servants came into the land of the children of Ammon.
[3] And the princes of the children of Ammon said unto Hanun their lord, Thinkest thou that David doth honour thy father, that he hath sent comforters unto thee? hath not David rather sent his servants unto thee, to search the city, and to spy it out, and to overthrow it?
[4] Wherefore Hanun took David's servants, and shaved off the one half of their beards, and cut off their garments in the middle, even to their buttocks, and sent them away.
[5] When they told it unto David, he sent to meet them, because the men were greatly ashamed: and the king said, Tarry at Jericho until your beards be grown, and then return.

Notice how the men were so ashamed. And David's reaction to their plight? Stay away until your beard grows out.

Why not just give them some clothes and let them shave the other half of their beard?

Because their beard was deeply connected to their man-hood!!!

Another situation occurs in . . .

Bible, King James Version


Deut.23
[1] He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD.

The man who had his manhood trampled on as you have described, would not even be allowed to be counted amongst the congregation of the LORD in the Old Testament.

Is our manhood important to God?

I think so. It is crucially important!

[houston]

Great post, Votive.

[houston]

I wish I could grow a beard

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by houston

I wish I could grow a beard

You'd be surprised what can happen. There are natural means of increasing testosterone, which will automatically cause increased facial hair. Unless you had some bad frost-bite or have an ethnic disposition toward no facial hair (as many Native Americans do), it's otherwise entirely within reason that you can, with help.

I mean, transgendered "men" so-called, end up growing facial hair, adam's apples, and etc. So if it can be done with these women, it can certainly be done with actual men.

[Amanah]

My husband has a beard, so hey.

Apostolic men unite! grow a beard!

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Amanah

My husband has a beard, so hey.

Apostolic men unite! grow a beard!

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Amanah

My husband has a beard, so hey.

Apostolic men unite! grow a beard!

[votivesoul]

The way I look at it is like this:

With the notion that the "head of Christ is God", when Simon Peter didn't savor the things of God, and tried to be Christ's head, and tell Him what to do regarding the cross, Jesus rebuked him hardcore and called him "Satan". Jesus wouldn't allow anyone to get between Him and His Head, which is God, the Father.

So, since Christ is the Head of every man, should any man do differently than Jesus did to Simon Peter?

The fact is, the Twelve are dead and so is Paul, and they aren't ever going to be replaced. Never have been, never will be. The canon is closed, right? We believe that, right? If so, then out of personal obligation to the closing of that canon that He Himself instituted, Jesus cannot give any man anywhere, no matter how spiritual or anointed they may be, a command that exists outside of the closed canon and then make it covenantly binding on others.

Now, Jesus may command a specific man to do a specific thing, and for that man, it is covenantly binding. But Jesus cannot utter a command to one man and tell that man to go and make it binding on other men, if it's not already canonized in the Holy Scriptures, else, the Lord violates His closed Word, that He Himself closed, meaning Jesus otherwise can freely make anything binding on anyone, without a book, chapter, or verse, to show for it. Is that what we believe?

But that's what we do when we make extra-biblical ideas (standards?) binding on other people. We are essentially saying Jesus has given us the right to take something from outside of the Bible and make you have to obey it.

But how do we know it's really from Jesus?

Because we're the pastor? elder? bishop? prophet? catholic magisterium? fill in the blank? and what we say is law?

Because that's how it works whenever anyone puts upon you an extra-Biblical standard or teaching and plays the "God told me" card on you.

They are usurping the Lord Jesus Christ and He will make them pay for it later if they don't repent of it now.

Is it a salvation issue? That's what everyone wants to know, right? Wrong question to ask. Instead ask: If I say, do, teach, or preach this, or try to make this binding on other people, but it's not really in the Bible, have I kicked Jesus off His throne so I can be King?

That's the real question. And if the answer is "yes", you better start trembling. END OF STORY.