11,153
edits
Long Hair or Uncut Hair: Difference between revisions
→Can a woman trim her hair?
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 80: | Line 80: | ||
With this, we see the true meaning of the scripture. Paul is saying that if a woman wants to cut her hair short, she might as well shave it. | With this, we see the true meaning of the scripture. Paul is saying that if a woman wants to cut her hair short, she might as well shave it. | ||
==Practices in the early church== | |||
Upon researching early church teachings on this subject, I could find no places where they addressed a “no cutting or trimming” doctrine. In fact, they taught that women were to be veiled with a separate covering other than hair. | |||
I believe 1 Corinthians 11:15 states that a woman’s hair is given to her for a covering. I believe that veiling was a cultural issue, just as it largely is in Middle Eastern culture today. Many supporters of a separate covering support their doctrine by stating that two separate Greek words are used to define the covering. The Greek word used in verses 5-7 is “katakalupto”, which means “to cover wholly, i.e. to veil”. The Greek word used in verse 15 is “peribolaion”, meaning “something thrown around one, i.e. a mantle or veil”. They also state that verses 5-7 are speaking of a temporary condition (praying or prophesying), so that it must mean a separate covering. | |||
As I see it, the fact that two separate Greek words are translated as covering does not change the meaning. Either way, verse 15 says that a woman’s hair is her covering, or mantle, or veil. In verses 5-7, Paul is asking “is it comely for a woman to prey or prophesy uncovered”? If not, then she should have long hair in order to pray or prophesy. I don’t believe this necessarily relates to a temporary condition that requires a separate covering for prayer or prophesying. | |||
In the early church it may have been a cultural necessity for the women to be veiled with a separate veil, but that doesn’t mean it is necessary in our culture. Similarly, the scriptures admonish us in four (4) separate places to “greet one another with a holy kiss”. We do not practice that as it is not our cultural custom, and even though it is sanctified as holy by the scriptures, it could be construed as perverted within our culture. | |||
Brother Branham’s Teaching: | |||
During his ministry, Brother William Marrion Branham spoke out against women with short hair hundreds if not thousands of times. He stressed the meaning and importance of 1 Corinthians 11 as it deals with God’s order for men and women, and how that relates to our order under Christ. He used terms such as “short hair”, “bobbed hair”, “cut off hair”, and “cut hair”. When he used the term “cut hair” was he referring to the legality of cutting or trimming even a fraction of an inch, or was he referring to a worldly, perverted and “unladylike” look resulting from cutting noticeable length from the hair? | |||
Brother Branham allowed his daughters to trim their hair, but it was not short like men’s hair. This is evident from the pictures in the “Messenger” / “Believers International” photo album, as well as admitted in his sermon on questions and answers as quoted below. As much as he preached against men without a backbone who allowed women to cut their hair, it seems unlikely that he would allow this within his own family if he truly believed “no trimming – period”. He stated that he “wished they (his daughters) didn’t even put a scissors in their hair”, but also stated that he didn’t think that would be wrong. When referring to older women with bangs, he said he thought they would be trying to look like “some little kid”, but he didn’t say it was wrong. | |||
One could make the argument that it is okay for young girls, but not for married women to cut or trim their hair. I don’t believe this is supported scripturally. The scripture states that a virgin cares for the things of God and how she can please God, while a married woman cares for her husband and how she can please her husband. A married woman is under the headship of her husband, while an unmarried woman is under the headship of her earthly father. All are under the headship of Christ. The unmarried woman being uncovered would dishonor her earthly father the same as a married woman being uncovered would dishonor her husband. | |||
Throughout William Branham's ministry, we have been unable to find him dealing with this subject, except in “Questions and Answers”, 64-0830M. The applicable section is included in its entirety below for proper context. | |||
:''1101-Q-343 343. When they cut it in... Is long--is long hair when they cut it in front? (Huh. Now, wait a minute; let me get this here. I...) Is long hair when they... | |||
:''Well, I--I--maybe they mean this: "Is it long hair any longer when they cut it in front?" Not any longer; they've cut it off. See? But like the man that had the trousers cut them off three times and still too short. What say? What say? [Brother Branham has conversation with someone in audience--Ed.] Oh, that's what they're talking about. As I tease my little girl, she said... The "booms" I call them, you know, bangs, or whatever it is, you know, across the front here. | |||
:''Well, I imagine those kids that's cutting their hair in front... You--maybe your mother could tell you about that (See?), if she wants you to do that way. I think it'd look kinda--kinda a little bit like a woman was looking through the rear view if she passed about twenty-five years old and wanted to cut them off in front like that, look like some little kid. Look on out here where you're going, sis, not where you've been. See? | |||
1102-186 And now, but cutting the hair, I--I--I'll tell you this. I can't--I--I ain't got no--no Scripture to say that you can cut so much of it and can't do the other. '''I--I haven't got no Scripture for that; I--I couldn't tell you that, sister, or brother, ever who it is.''' | |||
:''I say one thing. I wished... Now, '''I know my kids has done that too, Rebekah and Sarah''', I seen when they cut their hair off here in front, and plait it back here in the back, and make these things across the front, like this. I--I don't, I--I... Now, not holding them. See? No, sir. To me, I wished they didn't even put a scissors on their hair at all. But when they got all long, hanging down like this, and just cut the front of it out of their eyes, little kids maybe. '''I--I wouldn't know whether that'd be wrong; I wouldn't think so.''' See? But when you get... If you can, I--for you sisters, I'd just let it the way the Lord made it. See? | |||
:''And of course, I know women wants to look pretty; that's nature; and that--that's what they should be. See? They should be that way. And so, that's fine, but just don't--don't; otherwise like this, don't look like the world (See?); don't pattern after the world. Things wrong... You want it cut off, like that, but don't cut your hair now. If you got the braids hanging down, or--or whatever it is in your hair, you leave it long. Don't cut it like it's going to look like the world. If you're just them little girls...<ref>QUESTIONS.AND.ANSWERS_ JEFF.IN COD SUNDAY_ 64-0830M</ref> | |||
William Branham stated that he has no scripture to say “you can cut so much of it and not the other”. We agree with him on that. The scripture doesn’t say, just as it doesn’t give details to define modesty. It is based on appearance – a woman should look distinctly different from a man by her hair. Her long hair is her glory, and it is given to her as a covering. | |||
What does “Long” mean as used in 1 Corinthians 11?: | |||
After going through all of the preceding discussions, the entire question regarding the “no trimming” doctrine hinges upon the meaning of the word “long”. The “covering” discussed in 1 Corinthians 11 is the “hair”. If a man or woman has “long hair”, he or she is said to be “covered”. If a man or woman does not have “long hair”, he or she is said to be “uncovered”. The Greek word for “long” used in this chapter is “komao”, which is translated as “to let the hair grow, have long hair”. It would seem that “long” is a subjective term, just as “modesty” is a subjective term. God wants his people to dress in a manner that doesn’t excite the flesh of the opposite sex. God also wants men to be distinctly men and masculine, and women to be distinctly women and feminine. He is saying that nature itself teaches that the difference should be shown by the way the hair is worn. When men or women cross that line, it is a perversion. | |||
If the word “long” implies “uncut” hair for women, then it must have a completely different definition for men. No one would say that a man with hair to his waist and trimmed ends has short hair. “Nature itself” teaches us that this is wrong, according to Paul. However, if we take this meaning, a woman with hair to her waist and trimmed ends does by definition have short hair. These differing meanings are difficult to reconcile logically. | |||
True revelation from God will fulfill the scripture, not change it. We should not shy away from nor attempt to re-define words from scripture, teachings from the early church or reformers, or other pertinent information, but should confront these facts straight forwardly with respect to scriptural doctrine. We should never try to mold facts to fit a doctrine, but should mold our doctrine to fit God’s word. | |||
=Quotes of William Branham= | =Quotes of William Branham= | ||