I got a question

[Serenity278]

Hey everyone!

Why do some Pentecostals women believe in only wearing skirts and never cutting your hair? I am new to the faith and have recently started to attend a pentecostal church. They don't believe in woman wearing skirts and never cutting your hair to be sins. So am guessing there are different kinds of Pentecostals. Just curious about this.

God Bless!

 

[kspchemist]

Well, you are correct in that there are many, many different types of Pentecostals.

About the skirt issue:
Read Deuteronomy 22:5, "The woman shall not wear that pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God." Anyway the Bible has always called for a separation of the sexes in both action and look.

About the hair issue:
Read I Corinthians 11:1-16.

"1 Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.
2 Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.
3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.
4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.
5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.
6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.
7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.
8 For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man.
9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.
10 For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.
11 Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.
12 For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God.
13 Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?
14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?
15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.
16 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God."

Read through these verses it'll be clear that a woman is not to cut her hair, and a man is to cut his. Some people will misintrepert verse 16 to say that if you are going to be contentious over the issue then disregard the previous 15 verses. If the LORD didn't care about the hair issue, then why did HE allow Paul to write 15 verses about it. Anyway, Paul was saying that the church has no custom of being contentious.

If you have any questions about this, then let me know.

 

[Father Rick]

In the passage quoted by the previous poster, Paul was writing to the church in Corinth. In Corinth, there were pagan temples FILLED with temple prostitutes. In fact one of the most common forms of worship there was to have sex with a temple prostitute.

The female prostitutes were known by their shaved heads. The male prostitutes were typically very effiminate and had long hair ( basically 1st century drag queens). The religions were VERY dominated by the 'female oracles' who would have 'ecstatic utterances' that were supposedly from the gods.

In writing to these people, Paul was telling the Church not to copy the practices of the pagan religions. Women were not to shave their heads (to look like temple prostitutes) and men were not to look like drag queens.

This is an overall principle in scripture-- that men should look like/dress like men and women should look like/dress like women. Some pentecostal/holiness circles, however have taken this to an extreme and become legalistic about it.

True biblical principles apply to ALL people of ALL time AND location. In Scotland, men wear kilts. In Africa, many men wear nothing but a gourd and many women wear nothing but a loin cloth (if that). Christ and the disciples would have worn robes that would have looked much like a dress today. So a woman wearing pants was a non-issue, as no one wore pants--And is some places men wear skirts.

Some races of women (such as African)have naturally very short hair. Some races of men (such as Native American) have naturally very long hair. The emphasis of this passage is not about the length of the hair, but about not looking like a prostitute. I find it really interesting, that the passages referring to hair are interpretted by these holiness groups at their discretion. They say that this particular passage should be taken literally-- so they should not cut their hair. There is another passage that says for a woman not to be adorned with gold or with braided hair, but with Godliness. They take the first half of that passage literally to say a woman should not wear jewelry, but ignore the half about braided hair-- and have some of the most elaborate hairdo's of anybody-- BUT they leave the hair long.

Long story short, all these 'regulations' you bring up are new 'rules' (meaning the past 100 years or so) started by certain pentecostal/holiness groups and have not been teachings in the Church historically.

 

[praisegirl2]

My aunt was UPC pastor for 60yrs and they did not believe in cutting hair (women)
or wearing pants. Also if you did wear a dress that was to short or a dress that revealed to much including your arms they had extra skirts hanging in the hallway and they would make you wear them to go into the church. Also you could not show to much leg.
She is now retired and almost 90 yrs old and not in good health and someone else has taken over her church and I believe they do things differen.

Oh and NO makeup at all No Jewlery except a wedding band and a watch.

 

[journey4Christ]

It is my thot that in 1Corinthians verse 16 is a summary to resolve an issue within the church. A woman or man who is filled with the spirit of God knows how to dress. In modest apparel.

 

[kspchemist]

In the passage quoted by the previous poster, Paul was writing to the church in Corinth. In Corinth, there were pagan temples FILLED with temple prostitutes. In fact one of the most common forms of worship there was to have sex with a temple prostitute.

The female prostitutes were known by their shaved heads. The male prostitutes were typically very effiminate and had long hair ( basically 1st century drag queens). The religions were VERY dominated by the 'female oracles' who would have 'ecstatic utterances' that were supposedly from the gods.

In writing to these people, Paul was telling the Church not to copy the practices of the pagan religions. Women were not to shave their heads (to look like temple prostitutes) and men were not to look like drag queens.

This is an overall principle in scripture-- that men should look like/dress like men and women should look like/dress like women. Some pentecostal/holiness circles, however have taken this to an extreme and become legalistic about it.

First off I'll agree with your overall picture in that women need to look like women, and men need to look like men. In that we have common ground. Please explain where in the passage it talks about prostitutes? In the whole passage there is one reference to a specific person, and that is in verse 1 where Paul writes, "Be ye followers of me even I also am of CHrist." Paul set the example of how people should act in church. Please look again at verse 10, "For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels." Are the angles stuck in Greece? Absolutely not. We can conclude than this would be an applictible passage for all people for all time. Anyway if it was for the church in the 1st Century AD, then it must be applied now. Look at Hebrews 13:8, "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever."

True biblical principles apply to ALL people of ALL time AND location.

This does read the previous paragraph.

In Scotland, men wear kilts. In Africa, many men wear nothing but a gourd and many women wear nothing but a loin cloth (if that). Christ and the disciples would have worn robes that would have looked much like a dress today. So a woman wearing pants was a non-issue, as no one wore pants--And is some places men wear skirts.

What a farse. Y'all are only concerned about what something looks like through 21st century eyes. (I'm not trying to disrepect you, Father, but I have ran into this discussion before and all I here is this argument) Jesus NEVER wore woman's clothing, period. There was something in the difference between male and female clothing at the time that would have been clear to them, but it would not be so clear to us. Again with the Scottish kilt. It was male clothing, for reasons that I don't know. Bible NEVER condones men wearing women's clothing or vice versa. Pants were NEVER part of a woman's wardrobe, until the 1940s because of WWII. Isn't it illogical for society to be ok with women wearing men's clothing and not be ok with men wearing woman's clothing. Even culture demans that a man cannot wear a dress, so why should a woman be allowed to wear pants?

Some races of women (such as African)have naturally very short hair. Some races of men (such as Native American) have naturally very long hair. The emphasis of this passage is not about the length of the hair, but about not looking like a prostitute.

The emphasis is not about length of the hair, but NOT CUTTING IT. If a woman cannot grow long hair, it is not her fault. My mother-in-law hasn't cut her hair in years, and it cannot grow longer than shoulder-length. Is she in sin? No, since she is not cutting her hair.

They say that this particular passage should be taken literally-- so they should not cut their hair. There is another passage that says for a woman not to be adorned with gold or with braided hair, but with Godliness. They take the first half of that passage literally to say a woman should not wear jewelry, but ignore the half about braided hair-- and have some of the most elaborate hairdo's of anybody-- BUT they leave the hair long.

First off, it's not braided hair. The word you are looking for is broided. This is confirmed easily in a Strong's concordence. It comes from the Greek word, plegma, which translated is broided hair. So what is broided hair? It was the heathen custom of those days to weave jewels into thier hair. Paul wasn't concerned about whether a woman's hair was up or down.

Long story short, all these 'regulations' you bring up are new 'rules' (meaning the past 100 years or so) started by certain pentecostal/holiness groups and have not been teachings in the Church historically.

Here is a list of the denominations that preached these ideals:
Church of the Nazarine, Wesleyan Methodist, Presbyterian, Baptist, Congregational, Salvation Army, United Brethren, Church of God, Assemblies of God, Christian and Missionary Alliance, Methodist, Church of God in Christ, Free Methodist, Pilgrim Holiness, Pentecostal Holiness, and Free Will Baptist. Do you want a couple of well know preachers who preached about this? Look no farther than John Wesley and William Booth. As you can see, Pentecostal/Holiness groups were not the sole owners of this doctrine.

 

[Humble_Paladin]

In the passage quoted by the previous poster, Paul was writing to the church in Corinth. In Corinth, there were pagan temples FILLED with temple prostitutes. In fact one of the most common forms of worship there was to have sex with a temple prostitute.

The female prostitutes were known by their shaved heads. The male prostitutes were typically very effiminate and had long hair ( basically 1st century drag queens). The religions were VERY dominated by the 'female oracles' who would have 'ecstatic utterances' that were supposedly from the gods.

In writing to these people, Paul was telling the Church not to copy the practices of the pagan religions. Women were not to shave their heads (to look like temple prostitutes) and men were not to look like drag queens.

This is an overall principle in scripture-- that men should look like/dress like men and women should look like/dress like women. Some pentecostal/holiness circles, however have taken this to an extreme and become legalistic about it.

True biblical principles apply to ALL people of ALL time AND location. In Scotland, men wear kilts. In Africa, many men wear nothing but a gourd and many women wear nothing but a loin cloth (if that). Christ and the disciples would have worn robes that would have looked much like a dress today. So a woman wearing pants was a non-issue, as no one wore pants--And is some places men wear skirts.

Some races of women (such as African)have naturally very short hair. Some races of men (such as Native American) have naturally very long hair. The emphasis of this passage is not about the length of the hair, but about not looking like a prostitute. I find it really interesting, that the passages referring to hair are interpretted by these holiness groups at their discretion. They say that this particular passage should be taken literally-- so they should not cut their hair. There is another passage that says for a woman not to be adorned with gold or with braided hair, but with Godliness. They take the first half of that passage literally to say a woman should not wear jewelry, but ignore the half about braided hair-- and have some of the most elaborate hairdo's of anybody-- BUT they leave the hair long.

Long story short, all these 'regulations' you bring up are new 'rules' (meaning the past 100 years or so) started by certain pentecostal/holiness groups and have not been teachings in the Church historically.

WOW! Thanks for that awesome answer!

 

[Genes!s]

My grandfather's church used to be like this. None of the women wore pants EVER, and as a child, I was made to have long hair and wear dresses everywhere I went. My mom ended up letting me wear pants, eventually.

Now, the same church isn't at all like it used to be. There are still women who wear their dresses everywhere and have their long hair and no makeup, but that is no longer forced upon anyone else.

I honestly believe that forcefulness is what drove so many people away from the church. Looking back on it now, I think there was way too much attention put on what to and not to wear, than just being in the presence of God!

 

[Serenity278]

Thanx guys for all your posts

 

[Father Rick]

KSP...

It is extremely important to know HOW to interpret scripture...
The proper method is very simple.
1. What was the message to the original audience.
2. What is the timeless/eternal principle God is teaching us through that passage.
3. How do we apply that principle to our society today.

There are some things talked about in scripture that refer to cultural issues that are just different from our American culture. For example, we don’t have slavery today-- but that doesn’t mean we don’t throw out the book of Philemon, but rather we can draw wisdom in how for employers to deal with employees.

First, you address the issue of women wearing pants...
It is true that in America, women did not wear pants until the 1940’s. It is also true that in other countries (especially in the east), women have worn pants for many centuries as part of a “woman’s” outfit. A great example of this is to just look at the sari’s worn by Indian women, many of which include pants underneath for additional modesty. You say that we are trying to just look at things through 21st century eyes... yet that is exactly my point. Those who propose that pants are only “men’s” clothing are ONLY looking through early 20th century American eyes and not realizing that clothing styles vary from place to place throughout the centuries. Women in certain parts of the world were wearing pants at the time of Christ -- and not to look like a man either. (Just think ‘genie pants’ worn by ‘harem girls‘).

We both agree that women should not try to look like men and vice versa. The difference is that many in the Holiness movement are still ‘trapped’ in rules and regulations that may have been appropriate for a specific point in time, but not for all time/places. If pants were considered ‘men’s clothing’, then it would be wrong for women to wear them. Any trip to your local department store, however, will show that there are more styles and cuts of pants made for a woman than for a man-- in patterns and materials that no man I know of would ever wear. These are designed and cut specifically for a woman’s body shape, hence they even have a different sizing system etc.

As to cutting hair...
I gave information regarding the culture into which Paul was writing. He did not stop and explain to the Corinthians what their culture was, because they already knew their culture. “Proper” women did not go out into public at all without their head (including face) covered by a veil-- this is very much the same as it is in strict Muslim countries today. To not wear a veil was considered to be extremely immodest-- wanton actually. I have already discussed the issue of temple prostitution. Paul was telling these women not to look promiscuous. In fact, Paul, being sarcastic, actually goes as far as to say that if a woman was not going to wear a veil, then she should go ahead and shave her head completely. Women in the church of Corinth were flaunting the freedom they had in Christ by ‘throwing off’ their veils, etc. as part of a world’s culture that they were no longer part of. By doing so, they had brought disdain on the body of Christ. Paul was actually telling the women to dress like the rest of the women around them so that they didn’t attract so much attention to themselves. And, of course, there is that pesky little verse at the end-- “if any man is contentious, we have no such custom”. In other words, Paul was trying to make it clear that this was specific instructions for a specific situation-- not something that HAD to apply to everyone everywhere.

Now, as to the 1 Timothy passage (broided hair) You are correct about the Greek word, but wrong about the definition. The following is from a Strong’s Dictionary:

Strong's Number: 4117
Plegma
1. what is woven, plaited, or twisted together
2. a web, plait, braid
3. of a net
4. of a basket, in which the infant Moses was laid
5. of braided hair

It refers specifically to hair that is braided, woven, or twisted together ( no mention at all of jewels as you said). In other words, French twists, braids, etc. would all be outlawed if this was intended to be a literal command for all time. In fact, the little ‘pentecostal buns’ would be outlawed, since they are made by twisting the hair repeatedly, then wrapping it into a bun.

 

[NewSong]

I know you didn't post this just to be impressive I don't think but I have to say that I love it. Funny but this topic was popular with me earlier on culture and Scripture and what to do with it. Loved this particular post. Thanks.

NewSong

KSP...

It is extremely important to know HOW to interpret scripture...
The proper method is very simple.
1. What was the message to the original audience.
2. What is the timeless/eternal principle God is teaching us through that passage.
3. How do we apply that principle to our society today.

There are some things talked about in scripture that refer to cultural issues that are just different from our American culture. For example, we don’t have slavery today-- but that doesn’t mean we don’t throw out the book of Philemon, but rather we can draw wisdom in how for employers to deal with employees.

First, you address the issue of women wearing pants...
It is true that in America, women did not wear pants until the 1940’s. It is also true that in other countries (especially in the east), women have worn pants for many centuries as part of a “woman’s” outfit. A great example of this is to just look at the sari’s worn by Indian women, many of which include pants underneath for additional modesty. You say that we are trying to just look at things through 21st century eyes... yet that is exactly my point. Those who propose that pants are only “men’s” clothing are ONLY looking through early 20th century American eyes and not realizing that clothing styles vary from place to place throughout the centuries. Women in certain parts of the world were wearing pants at the time of Christ -- and not to look like a man either. (Just think ‘genie pants’ worn by ‘harem girls‘).

We both agree that women should not try to look like men and vice versa. The difference is that many in the Holiness movement are still ‘trapped’ in rules and regulations that may have been appropriate for a specific point in time, but not for all time/places. If pants were considered ‘men’s clothing’, then it would be wrong for women to wear them. Any trip to your local department store, however, will show that there are more styles and cuts of pants made for a woman than for a man-- in patterns and materials that no man I know of would ever wear. These are designed and cut specifically for a woman’s body shape, hence they even have a different sizing system etc.

As to cutting hair...
I gave information regarding the culture into which Paul was writing. He did not stop and explain to the Corinthians what their culture was, because they already knew their culture. “Proper” women did not go out into public at all without their head (including face) covered by a veil-- this is very much the same as it is in strict Muslim countries today. To not wear a veil was considered to be extremely immodest-- wanton actually. I have already discussed the issue of temple prostitution. Paul was telling these women not to look promiscuous. In fact, Paul, being sarcastic, actually goes as far as to say that if a woman was not going to wear a veil, then she should go ahead and shave her head completely. Women in the church of Corinth were flaunting the freedom they had in Christ by ‘throwing off’ their veils, etc. as part of a world’s culture that they were no longer part of. By doing so, they had brought disdain on the body of Christ. Paul was actually telling the women to dress like the rest of the women around them so that they didn’t attract so much attention to themselves. And, of course, there is that pesky little verse at the end-- “if any man is contentious, we have no such custom”. In other words, Paul was trying to make it clear that this was specific instructions for a specific situation-- not something that HAD to apply to everyone everywhere.

Now, as to the 1 Timothy passage (broided hair) You are correct about the Greek word, but wrong about the definition. The following is from a Strong’s Dictionary:
It refers specifically to hair that is braided, woven, or twisted together ( no mention at all of jewels as you said). In other words, French twists, braids, etc. would all be outlawed if this was intended to be a literal command for all time. In fact, the little ‘pentecostal buns’ would be outlawed, since they are made by twisting the hair repeatedly, then wrapping it into a bun.

 

[Gumdrop71]

Cutting one's hair is NOT a sin. The Nazarenes and Wesleyan DO NOT teach that women are cross dressing if they wear pants or cut their hair.
Since when are 20th century standards Biblical standards? Didn't Nazarite men have LONG hair? JEsus and The Apostles wore robe like clothing correct?

 

[ChristyP4Christ]

I am Pentecostal. I wear makeup and even wear slacks to church. I do hair for a living so yes I cut it often. God looks on our hearts. I do agree that not just women, but everyone should conduct themselves in their dress in a way that would be pleasant and not distracting to others.

 

[Gumdrop71]

Christy, for some Pentecostals to use 20th century style of dress as a measuring stick for holiness is wrong, in my opinion. Of course if one believes cutting their hair will sway them then don't do it. BUT to accuse others of cross dressing is horrid.
I wonder what those think about SAMSON. Who was a male with LONG hair.

 

[Emma!]

In the passage quoted by the previous poster, Paul was writing to the church in Corinth. In Corinth, there were pagan temples FILLED with temple prostitutes. In fact one of the most common forms of worship there was to have sex with a temple prostitute.

The female prostitutes were known by their shaved heads. The male prostitutes were typically very effiminate and had long hair ( basically 1st century drag queens). The religions were VERY dominated by the 'female oracles' who would have 'ecstatic utterances' that were supposedly from the gods.

In writing to these people, Paul was telling the Church not to copy the practices of the pagan religions. Women were not to shave their heads (to look like temple prostitutes) and men were not to look like drag queens.

This is an overall principle in scripture-- that men should look like/dress like men and women should look like/dress like women. Some pentecostal/holiness circles, however have taken this to an extreme and become legalistic about it.

True biblical principles apply to ALL people of ALL time AND location. In Scotland, men wear kilts. In Africa, many men wear nothing but a gourd and many women wear nothing but a loin cloth (if that). Christ and the disciples would have worn robes that would have looked much like a dress today. So a woman wearing pants was a non-issue, as no one wore pants--And is some places men wear skirts.

Some races of women (such as African)have naturally very short hair. Some races of men (such as Native American) have naturally very long hair. The emphasis of this passage is not about the length of the hair, but about not looking like a prostitute. I find it really interesting, that the passages referring to hair are interpretted by these holiness groups at their discretion. They say that this particular passage should be taken literally-- so they should not cut their hair. There is another passage that says for a woman not to be adorned with gold or with braided hair, but with Godliness. They take the first half of that passage literally to say a woman should not wear jewelry, but ignore the half about braided hair-- and have some of the most elaborate hairdo's of anybody-- BUT they leave the hair long.

Long story short, all these 'regulations' you bring up are new 'rules' (meaning the past 100 years or so) started by certain pentecostal/holiness groups and have not been teachings in the Church historically.

 

[TwistrAndy]

Kspchemist, didn't say that the all those denomintations preached holiness today, what he meant was is that, back in the day, when the denominations were first starting out, they did preach this doctrine. I mean it wasn't but about 10 years ago that the first Baptist lady in our town put on a pair of pants, and when she did the other women didn't like it. So yes, each denomination AT ONE TIME did preach the holiness doctrine. Make-up was frowned upon also by many denominations back then too.

 

[songbird88]

never mind

 

[Gumdrop71]

So yes, each denomination AT ONE TIME did preach the holiness doctrine. Make-up was frowned upon also by many denominations back then too.
[Report Bad Post] quote.gif [Quick reply to this message]
====================
What does this accomplish, other than having some standards which are really not Biblical but more cultural?
Again, if someone is swayed by cutting their hair fine. But to say 20th century standards are ordered from The Bible is false.

 

[Father Rick]

Kspchemist, didn't say that the all those denomintations preached holiness today, what he meant was is that, back in the day, when the denominations were first starting out, they did preach this doctrine. I mean it wasn't but about 10 years ago that the first Baptist lady in our town put on a pair of pants, and when she did the other women didn't like it. So yes, each denomination AT ONE TIME did preach the holiness doctrine. Make-up was frowned upon also by many denominations back then too.

Twistr...

In my lifetime, I have never known of a Baptist church that had a problem with women wearing pants. I'm not saying that it wasn't that way in your town, just that I've never heard of that (and I'm more than twice your age). I do find it interesting that you are able to remember such issues from when you were only 6 yrs old.

Now, if we go back about 200 years, we find that it was standard practice for MEN to wear makeup, and high heels... right along with their powdered wigs. This was not considered an attempt to be effeminate at all... in fact, women did NOT dress in this fashion at all at the time. Just look at this portrait of King Louis XIV from the early 1700's

Throughout history, styles/tastes have changed. Scripture does NOT give legalistic rules as to what to wear/not to wear, but rather general guidelines such as 'be modest', men should not dress like women and vice versa., etc.

 

[ChristyP4Christ]

In my lifetime, I have never known of a Baptist church that had a problem with women wearing pants.

I have!!!! When I was in my late 20s I worked second shift in a factory. Across the street was a Baptist Church. I was really missing being in church on Wen nights, so on my dinner break I would walk across the street and sit on as much as I could before returning to work.
After about three months of doing this I was approched by the Pastor and he asked if I could wear a dress when I come on Wen nights? I explained to him my situation and he point blank told me it was against their beliefs for woman to wear pants and if I could not wear a dress that I needed to find another church.
For the next few weeks I sat out side the door and had my dinner so I could hear the praise and worship and the pastors wife seen me one Wen and asked me to leave and never come back....
I still pray for that church all these years later.