4. The Nazarite Principle
Acts 18:18 Paul had his hair shorn off at Cenchrea. Why? He had a vow and that is likely where he was when the royal edict from king Agrippa when out that Nazarites were to shave their heads. We have the following historical note from Josephus (Anitquities of the Jews, Book 19, Chapter 6, Section 1):
“[King Agrippa] also came to Jerusalem and offered all the sacrifices that belonged to him, and omitted nothing which the law required; on which account he ordained that many of the Nazirites should have their heads shorn. ”
The only time that taking of a vow and shearing of the hair are mentioned together is in connection with the Nazarite vow (Numbers 6:5), which was given as a law that specifically required, among other things, that any man or woman dedicated to God's service must allow his or her hair to grow. This law of the Nazarite was not given in response to any incident or any question arising from application or understanding of any other law but was appointed by God on His own initiative. Since God Himself has issued this command for men to grow their hair long, there cannot be anything, morally or spiritually, wrong with a man who chooses to do so. It would be out of character for God to appoint, as a form of true worship, anything which He would deem inappropriate.
Note the provision for renewal of an incomplete vow in Numbers 6:9-12. In Acts 21:17-28 Paul does this at the request of the brethren in Jerusalem, along with four other men who also have the vow. Also, notice how Paul was not recognized until the seven days were almost ended. Why not? Strong's Concordance, in its lexicon entry for #3700, contrasts Greek synonyms for the words “to see” or “to look”, thus:
991:denotes simply voluntary observation
1492:expresses merely mechanical, passive or casual vision
2334:signifies an earnest but more continued inspection
3700:to gaze with wide-open eyes, as at something remarkable
3708:to stare at something
4648:watching from a distance
The word for “saw” in Acts 21:27 is #2300: less emphatically intense than #2334, it means “to look closely at, to perceive”. That is exactly what happened to Paul - on the seventh day, the Jews from Asia perceived he was there after he had shaved. Num. 6:9 states that it is on the seventh day of the cleansing that shaving of the head is required. The vow itself was not given any specific time frame, except that the time was to be determined prior to commencing it. Paul's hair had grown so much by this time that he had become completely unrecognizable until he shaved. So if Paul willingly allowed his hair to grow to this extent, why is it that he says in 1 Corinthians 11:14 that it is a shameful thing to do? Was Paul a hypocrite? Was the Nazarite supposed to be ashamed of the visible evidence of his covenant with God?
I Thessalonians. 3:1-2
It seems here that Paul sent Timothy to Thessalonica because he could not stand to wait any longer to get news of their spiritual welfare. But, if that were his only reason for doing so, he would have taken the voyage himself, instead of thinking it good to be left at Athens alone. Furthermore, if Paul's real concern here was just the matter of whether or not the brethren at Thessalonica were doing well, it would have made far better sense for him to go there himself, rather than for him to send Timothy:Paul's status as a Roman Citizen gave him influence with the authorities which Silas and Timothy, who did not have this privileged position, would not be able to avail themselves of in his absence. So why did Paul want to send Timothy on alone to Thessalonica while he stayed in Athens? What did he have to attend to that was so important that he stayed behind in Athens even though his heart yearned to go to Thessalonica? Knowing the customs of Athenian society from being daily in their market place (Acts 17:17), he knew to send Timothy on an errand so he could give his address at the Areopagus (Acts 17:18-33) to a group of people, the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers, who otherwise wouldn't have been inclined to pay any attention to him. Why wouldn't they have listened? Unger's Bible Dictionary sheds some light on this, where, in the entry for “hair”, we have the following recorded of the Greeks:
“. . . A free Athenian citizen did not wear his hair very short, or he would have been mistaken for a slave, who would be obliged to do so. . . . ”
and of the Hebrews:
“. . . the usual custom for men being to cut the hair from time to time with a razor, but without shaving it bare. . . . ”
Flavius Josephus has this to say about the Nazarites in The Antiquities of the Jews, Book 4, Chapter 4, Section 4:
“Moreover, when any have made a sacred vow, I mean those that are called Nazirites, that suffer their hair to grow long, and use no wine, when they consecrate their hair, and offer it for a sacrifice, they are to allot that hair for the priests [to be thrown into the fire]. ”(italics ours)
Josephus, being contemporary with Paul, and having been a priest himself at the temple in Jerusalem, would have known for certain what a Nazarite looked like, and whether or not a Nazarite would grow his hair long.
Thus Paul, being a long-haired Nazarite man, would have been accepted as a peer by the Athenian “university crowd”, whereas Timothy, being a short-haired Hebrew man, would have been slighted as though he were aslave. If Paul had appeared at the Areopagus with Timothy,treating him as an equal, he too would have been snubbed and thus ruined a good opportunity for preaching. We see from this that it was a shameful thing for a man to have short hair in Athens just as it was strictly a local issue in Corinth that it was a shame for a man to have long hair.
The reason for this local custom in Corinth was that Corinthian society was based almost entirely on the Roman system of things. Men had fairly short hair and women had long hair which they wore styled and ornamented for beauty. The only men that would have habitually worn long hair were the sodomites (male prostitutes) from the pagan temples. The natural way accepted by most was short hair.
Although this was the custom of Corinth, it was not a worldwide custom- see Unger's Bible Dictionary, published in 1957 by the Moody Bible Institute in Chicago, Illinois. Most secular historians also agree, as do artworks and artifacts from the Renaissance, Medieval, Classical, and Pre-classical periods of history. And consider also what is written of Absalom in 2 Samuel 14:25-26: he cut his hair once every year because it was heavy upon him. If hair grows heavy upon a man's head, it is reason to cut it more frequently, not less. Therefore, this indicated that cutting the hair every year was considered often for them - something they took notice of.
