An alternative take on head coverings

[IshChayil]

Too late, its always been considered cannon by the Ethiopian church.

Or as Rob Skiba puts it...Synchronized, Biblically Endorsed, Extra-Biblical Texts.

Im aware of that but
I’m not following. Are you saying if any sect canonized a book, all believers should include it in the canon? So do you believe Maccabees, tobith, dan and the dragon, etc are canon because the Catholic Church recognizes?
I think more likely I just missed what you mean, shalom

 

[IshChayil]

Not you the article with the podcast

Contrived means deliberately created rather than arising naturally or spontaneously. Artifical, phony, false, manifactured, amongst a few others.

I was being contrary.

I was thinking of this “contrived” “ created or arranged in a way that seems artificial and unrealistic.” Creating a position (artificially Ie which you don’t believe is correct) when I said I hadn’t seen any better positions still seems contrived fits the bill.

I may be off in my word choice though, living abroad for over a decade takes its toll on the old native language vocab. Thanks for not correcting my spelling too!

 

[Nikud]

Creating a position (artificially Ie which you don’t believe is correct) when I said I hadn’t seen any better positions still seems contrived fits the bill.

It would have if I created the position, I mearly stated a couple of positions that are held by others, for options, along with the position I do hold and I differentiated between the too. If this was a real time conversation it would have been made clearer sooner.

I know you lose some vocabulary when it's not used and surrounded by non native languages. That's part of the problem here. The other is words on a screen don't reflect the tone or real nature of how something's being said. That inflection is lost in translation. Plus humor isn't my strong point and my bad jokes usally go unnoticed.

Anyway, Shabbat Shalom

 

[IshChayil]

I’ve been thinking about this idea of the man having long hair and have enjoyed the differing views presented. Somethings that have been floating around in my mind about the Nazarite vows,

Any man could vow a Nazarite vow, few of them were lifelong. Most were to be until the end of the year or until The Fast began at Yom Teruah/Rosh Hoshanna. During this period, (as I understand it) due to the stipulations against bathing and cutting their hair, they were to be considered as unclean for Temple admittance, yet holy due to their sanctification. Prior to Yom Teruah, those who had a temporary vow would bathe and shave their heads and resume interaction within the Temple for the 10 days of the fast.

Perhaps this is why it was a shame for a man to have long hair, because it effectively categorized them along with the other unwelcome guests to the Temple such as those who had physical handicaps or infirmities or who were otherwise ceremonially unclean.

They were in effect outwardly unclean, yet inwardly holy and acceptable before God.

(It’s been a while since I studied on the Nazarite vows and their relation to the feast days. I don’t recall off the top of my head the source material for the vows above. If anyone has a dissenting understanding, perhaps I’ll take the time to source these thoughts, otherwise I’ve enjoyed observing the topic)

I hadn’t heard that Nazarites were not allowed in the temple,during the tenure of their vows.

That’s quite interesting (and sounds like some ignorance I should clear up in myself).
I know they were not allowed to even bury their own parents if they died during the vow bc it would render the Nasir unclean and his vow nullified. If it’s nit too time consuming could you source it for me (if Kevin doesn’t beat you to it)

 

[Verifyveritas76]

Hey you don’t mean 1 Enoch where the Greek and Aramaic ar considered much more reliable, you are talking about other books which have the title Enoch but decidedly different authorship right?
Just like one of the much later books with the same name is only fully available in Old Slavonic...another in Coptic...

If you mean first Enoch can you share why you are interested later translation over the Greek and Aramaic?
Curious what you are looking for (and what I may have missed)

Just curious to see the differences for myself. Right now I’m on a kick to go thru the early church fathers so it’ll probably have to wait but?

 

[Nikud]

http://www.biblicalfamilies.org/forum/threads/heres-some-information-about-the-nazerite-vow.14061/

There's alot about the Nazerite vow I've collected. I posted most of it there.

I hadn’t heard that Nazarites were not allowed in the temple,during the tenure of their vows.

That’s quite interesting (and sounds like some ignorance I should clear up in myself).

There is actually a little substance to what @Verifyveritas76 posted. Some Rabbi did not allow Nazerites to enter their synagogues because of the way they interpretated this.

At the end of the nazirite period the nazirite brings three sacrifices in the Temple of Jerusalem. The first is a ewe for a chatat (sin offering), the second is lamb for an olah (elevation offering), and finally a ram as a shelamim (peace offering) along with a basket of matzah and their grain and drink offerings. After bringing the sacrifices the nazirite shaves his or her head in the outer courtyard of the Temple.

The interpretation simplified : They were unclean and had to make offerings to end the Vow. No Temple, no way to end the vow.

 

[IshChayil]

http://www.biblicalfamilies.org/forum/threads/heres-some-information-about-the-nazerite-vow.14061/

There's alot about the Nazerite vow I've collected. I posted most of it there.


There is actually a little substance to what @Verifyveritas76 posted. Some Rabbi did not allow Nazerites to enter their synagogues because of the way they interpretated this.

At the end of the nazirite period the nazirite brings three sacrifices in the Temple of Jerusalem. The first is a ewe for a chatat (sin offering), the second is lamb for an olah (elevation offering), and finally a ram as a shelamim (peace offering) along with a basket of matzah and their grain and drink offerings. After bringing the sacrifices the nazirite shaves his or her head in the outer courtyard of the Temple.

The interpretation simplified : They were unclean and had to make offerings to end the Vow. No Temple, no way to end the vow.

The way I learned this, was that the sin offering wasn’t about uncleaness, the sages interpretted Hashem was concerned people would get addicted to the aescetic lifestyle and since life is a gift from Hashem (including it’s enjoyment, wine etc) the sin offering was for the sin of depriving enjoyment which Hashem had given in life to a certain degree. It’s in bavli tractate Sotah but I don’t remember where.

 

[IshChayil]

The connection with male pattern baldness and testosterone could be something to consider.

Just came acreoss this and thought of your baldness comment.
Mishnah tractate berakhot 7:2A teaches that a bald-headed man may not serve as a priest in the temple...
Avoiding horny priests? Didn’t want relapse of Eli’s sons?

 

[Nikud]

The way I learned this, was that the sin offering wasn’t about uncleaness, the sages interpretted Hashem was concerned people would get addicted to the aescetic lifestyle and since life is a gift from Hashem (including it’s enjoyment, wine etc) the sin offering was for the sin of depriving enjoyment which Hashem had given in life to a certain degree. It’s in bavli tractate Sotah but I don’t remember where.

I personally had always thought the sin offering was for ending the Vow, but I know that is cultral influence for me.

bald-headed man may not serve as a priest in the temple...
Avoiding horny priests? Didn’t want relapse of Eli’s sons?

What about Elijah then? Good enough to be a prophet but not a preist?

 

[IshChayil]

I personally had always thought the sin offering was for ending the Vow, but I know that is cultral influence for me.

it is, but it is also an emergency contingency in the case of a Nazir inadvertently becoming tamed lnepeš
The sin is still his even though unintentional

”(baldness) good enough to be a prophet but not a priest?”
Apparently so. That’s why I speculated it may have been reactionary to Eli’s sons.
Cohanim had way more access to way more people than the standard prophet...
Or...prophet was a higher station, he hears the nabua, the very divine instruction whereas a priest often just followed protocol, no guarantee He ever heard from Hashem. So it’s understandable the prophet is at a much much higher level, Hashem shouldn’t normally need to be concerned about gross misconduct from a prophet, like stooping all the gals who brought their sacrifices...
In conclusion “go up ye baldhead go up!”