hair – La Vista Church of Christ

Braided Hair

Jeffrey Hamilton — Mon, 28 Jul 2025 17:20:52 +0000

Author Unknown

I still remember someone telling a teenage girl that her braided hair was wrong. He cited the scripture in I Timothy 2:9. I remember going home to look at that passage to see if that is what it really says. Sure enough, here is what it says.

"Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments, but rather by means of good works, as is proper for women making a claim to godliness" (I Timothy 2:9-10).

After studying the history of braiding, I have come to understand this passage better. In ancient times, only the wealthiest braided their hair. Braids were not the pigtails seen today. The braids were often very, very extravagant and might take a whole day to complete. Of course, the treatment came with many servants waiting on her throughout the day. Its purpose was to flaunt wealth and status, much like rare and expensive jewelry.
So, the issue is not braided hair, but what it represented at the time. The problem was aligning with and adopting the world's values. The issue is modesty.

A simple definition of modesty is humility expressed through one's appearance. Immodesty is a form of pride and arrogance that is expressed through one's appearance. This means that modesty is a reflection of our hearts, something that scripture bears out:

"Your adornment must not be merely external--braiding the hair, and wearing gold jewelry, or putting on dresses; but let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the imperishable quality of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in the sight of God" (I Peter 3:3-4).

Fashion designers do not value modesty or a "gentle and quiet spirit." They value just the opposite. Christians need to be acutely aware of this when they go shopping at the mall. The braided hair of ancient times has given way to other forms of pride reflected in appearance. Sometimes it is a wardrobe to display social status. Often, it is something that is too little or too tight, such as a short skirt or a buff guy who wears a shirt two sizes too small. Whatever it is, the root of immodesty comes from the heart. It is an expression of pride.

Don't misunderstand. This is not a prohibition against enhancing your appearance. The passages speak of "adorning" yourself, but in a proper and godly way. "Adornment" refers to the act of decorating, enhancing, or making something attractive. The Proverbs 31 woman wore fine clothing, Esther underwent beauty treatments, and the woman of the Song of Solomon wore jewelry.

So, what does godly adornment consist of? According to these passages, it boils down to these things.

Proper clothing. This means it reflects the grace and beauty of womanhood, or the honor and dignity of manhood.
Good works.
A humble heart. Rather than just a modesty check, do a heart check.

Ask yourself the following questions: What is my motivation for wearing this? What statement does my appearance make? Whose and what kinds of attention do I crave? Is God a part of my decision in my appearance?

Is it a sin for a woman to cut her hair?

Jeffrey Hamilton — Sun, 21 Jul 2024 20:54:14 +0000

Question:

Is it a sin for a woman to cut her hair?

Answer:

"Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him? But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her for a covering" (I Corinthians 11:14-15).

"Long" is a relative term. God is not dictating a specific length of hair. Instead, he insists that men's prevailing hairstyles are shorter than women's. I don't know of a passage that forbids a woman from cutting her hair.

Questions about long hair, piercings, and tattoos

Jeffrey Hamilton — Sat, 11 Jul 2020 20:34:14 +0000

Question:

I recently found a few questions at the back of my head:

Is having long hair a sin?

I am a male and have about chin-length hair. Am I in the wrong in keeping it this length, and wanting to grow it to reach my shoulders? When thinking about men and long hair, the verse that first comes to my mind is in I Corinthians. The Bible says it is a shame for a man to have long hair, but does that mean it is a sin?

Is a man having piercings a sin?

This question comes simply from my parents believing it makes a man appear feminine, but I believe the opposite. I can't find any verses saying outright that it is a sin, so this has been tricky for me to understand.

Is having a tattoo a sin?

In Exodus, God says not to mark our skin with tattoos. However, I recently came across a video that said God only told them not to have tattoos because they did not have the tools that we have today to be able to do it safely and sanitarily, and I've seen a few Christians with tattoos.

I've been wanting to grow my hair out for a long time and I would like to get a piercing (septum ring and industrial piercing of the ear), and I want to get a tattoo when I'm legally old enough, but I don't know if I will be going against God's will by doing so.

Answer:

Long Hair on Males

"Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him?" (I Corinthians 11:14).

"Short" or "long" are relative terms. God is not dictating a specific length of hair. Instead, He is insisting that the prevailing hairstyles among men are to be shorter than the prevailing hairstyles among women. Since the beginning of time, God expected a distinction to be made between the sexes. For example, in the law of Moses God said, "A woman must not wear men's clothing, nor a man wear women's clothing, for the Lord your God detests anyone who does this" (Deuteronomy 22:5). Other than articles of clothing, the relative length of hair is the most distinctive difference between men and women. If the hair on a man leaves you wondering whether the person is a he or a she, then the hair is too long.

By calling it a "dishonor" means it is something that should be seen as shameful or embarrassing. There have been exceptions, such as Samson never cutting his hair because he was under a Nazarite vow. However, men like Samson stood out because normally men left their hair short.

The reason men tend to have short hair is due to "nature;" in other words, the natural order of the world. This is the same word Paul used when arguing that homosexuality was wrong because it was against nature (Romans 1:26). Men tend to be more practical and direct. They tend to get involved in heavy labor (because they are muscular). Long hair is hot, gets in the way of work, and requires extra care; hence, men naturally gravitate to having short hair.

Piercings

In the Old Testament, we find that both men and women wore earrings in Israel. "And Aaron said to them, 'Break off the golden earrings which are in the ears of your wives, your sons, and your daughters, and bring them to me'" (Exodus 32:2). In this case, what they did with the donated gold was sinful, but we are taking notice that they had earrings. Later we find the men and women donating some of their jewelry to God. "They came, both men and women, as many as had a willing heart, and brought earrings and nose rings, rings and necklaces, all jewelry of gold, that is, every man who made an offering of gold to the LORD" (Exodus 35:22). Other passages mentioning earrings are Numbers 31:50; Judges 8:24-26; Proverbs 25:12; and Ezekiel 16:12). Thus, there is nothing intrinsically wrong with wearing jewelry, including earrings.

Thus, much would depend on how society, in general, would view a piercing. For example, a pierced ear in Israelite culture was a statement that the person was a permanent slave (Exodus 21:6; Deuteronomy 15:17).

Tattoos

Under the Old Law, the Israelites were forbidden to imitate the idolatrous religions around them. One practice was to make marks on the body, either by tattoos or by scarring to show which god (or ancestor) you served. So God told the Israelites, "You shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor tattoo any marks on you: I am the LORD" (Leviticus 19:28). This law had nothing to do with health reasons. The video you were watching featured someone's imagination and not expressing what the Bible taught.

Today, tattoos are seen as decorative marks but they can still be used wrongly. Tattoos that give support for false or immoral ideas would be wrong as these go against Christian teachings. You also have to consider that tattoos are permanent. If you change your mind, the tattoo still remains.

Rebellion

What I notice is that you indicated that your parents are against the things you are doing. Thus, I am left to wonder how much of your motivation is not because you think it looks good as it is because it is not what your parents want for you. Therefore, I would like you to consider what message you will be giving to others about yourself by your choices. Is it good for a Christian to tell people that he rebels against conventions?

"But we know that the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully, realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching" (I Timothy 1:8-10).

One of the reasons elders are selected from men who don't show themselves to be rebellious (Titus 1:6) is because we don't want anything to hinder our ability to spread the gospel to others so that they might be saved.

But Paul had long hair, at least for a time

Jeffrey Hamilton — Wed, 05 Feb 2020 23:37:19 +0000

Question:

One thing I wonder at is that with as adamant as I Corinthians 11 appears to read, Paul actually chose not to cut his hair while at Corinth, but only after he had left. This means Paul was on some do-not-cut-hair vow while at Corinth. So we shouldn't see a conflict between Paul's words of generality and specific circumstances in which one might have slightly longer than normal hair (since we don't know how long Paul's hair got).

What I wonder is: are Paul's statements concerning hair in I Corinthians 11 similar to his statements concerning circumcision elsewhere? If we were to read Galatians by itself, we might well come to the conclusion that any person who circumcises for any reason is in the wrong. However, with other circumstances Paul had Timothy circumcised specifically in regards to His work in the Kingdom. So I would caution ever taking a single passage and making it a rule, especially when, as noted in the article, it is only intended to deal with undefined generalisms, and the specific application to the Corinthians is ambiguous.

Answer:

It is curious at first (especially if I picture a Samson-looking Paul leaving Corinth). But the apparent contrast between Paul's words to Corinth and Paul's hair at Corinth seems to go away when we consider how frequently Jewish men of the time cut their hair -- as contrasted with how long a standard Nazarite vow lasted -- one month (unless additional times were added):

References:

From Jewish Encyclopedia.com:

"The duration of Nazariteship was voluntary, and ranged from one hour to a lifetime. In the former case, however, it really lasted for thirty days, which was also the period when no definite time was set (ib. i. 3; Sifre, Deut. 357). "
Nazarite vows were taken also outside of Palestine (Naz. v. 4; iii. 6).
Josephus referring to the thirty days demanded, as above, in the passage already quoted—"B. J." ii. 15, § 1."

This is also addressed in Joachim Jeremias' book "Jerusalem in the time of Jesus," if I remember correctly.

How long does a man's hair grow in a month?

"The American Academy of Dermatology says that hair grows about 1/2 inch per month on average."

So rather than picturing a long-haired Paul leaving Corinth, and then writing back to Corinth that it is shameful for a man to have long hair; Paul may have let his hair grow for 30 days, which means it was half an inch longer than before, and then had his head shorn in Cenchrea.

Scott Smelser

Response:

I agree. My point simply was that a lack of evidence on the issue should make us pause. And the fact that hair cutting and Corinth are thus juxtaposed should make us be all the more careful.

Answer:

It is always dangerous to draw conclusions from a lack of information. The typical Nazarite vow lasts for a period of time (Numbers 6:4) and then ends with the shaving of the head (Numbers 6:18). The hair that grew during the vow was then burnt as a part of the sacrifice to God. As Scott points out, traditionally a typical vow lasted for a month. "Now she dwelt then at Jerusalem, in order to perform a vow which she had made to God; for it is usual with those that had been either afflicted with a distemper, or with any other distresses, to make vows; and for thirty days before they are to offer their sacrifices, to abstain from wine, and to shave the hair of their head" [Josephus, Wars of the Jews, 2.15.1].

We also know that Paul was in Corinth for 18 months during this time (Acts 18:11) and cut his hair in Cenchrea (Acts 18:18), so the vow would have been less than 18 months. Actually, there is a question of whether this hair cut signaled the end of Paul's vow or the beginning of one. The wording in Acts 18:18 isn't clear. However, there is nothing in Acts 18 to indicate that Paul did not cut his hair for the whole time he was in Corinth. At best, we can guess that he stopped at some point and cut his hair in Cenchrea or that he started a vow at Cenchrea and ended sometime later.

There are questions as to whether the vow was truly a Nazarite vow. People assume it was because the shaving of the head is mentioned, but a different word for the cutting of the hair is used in Acts 18:18 (keiro - shorn) than the word used for the cutting at the completion of a vow in Acts 21:24 (xurao - shaved). And the law required that the completion of the vow be done at the temple (Numbers 6:13) and Paul wasn't there. Besides, those under the Nazarite vow could not consume anything made of grapes, but Paul would partake of the Lord's Supper each first day of the week and it is specifically mentioned taking the Lord's Supper in Troas in Acts 20:7ff. Thus, if it was a Nazarite vow, Paul would not be under one for more than a week.

However you end up viewing this, this would not be a case of Paul having long hair and does not show inconsistency on Paul's part.

In regards to circumcision, Paul did not say circumcision was wrong. He stated that requiring circumcision because the Old Law required it was wrong (Galatians 5:1-4). Circumcision itself no longer has meaning under the New Law. "For neither is circumcision anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation" (Galatians 6:15).

It does not matter if God gave directions once or dozens of times, God's commands are to be obeyed. I can find many instances where God indicates that His directions must be followed. I know of no indication that God said that a single command is only a suggestion.

Did Jesus have long hair because the Shroud of Turin shows long hair?

Jeffrey Hamilton — Tue, 08 Oct 2019 19:42:16 +0000

Question:

Hi.

Catholics and other denominations think Jesus had long hair because of the Shroud of Turin. What is your say on this?

Answer:

The Shroud of Turin first appeared in 1354. It is a 14-foot piece of linen cloth with a faint depiction of a crucified man in the stains of the cloth. The Roman Catholic church officially refers to the shroud as an icon, meaning it has a religious significance, but it is not called a relic. Therefore, even the Roman Catholic church is not certain enough to claim it is the burial cloth of Jesus.

Studies of the cloth have been mixed. Luigi Garlaschelli recreated the shroud in 2009, showing that it is possible to create a similar effect without a miracle being involved. A study in 1988 using carbon-dating from three labs showed that the cloth dates from the middle ages (from between A.D. 1260 and 1390). Another study, done in 2013 using infrared light and spectroscopy, dated the shroud between 280 B.C. and A.D. 220. However, the 1988 study appears to have more solid support.

A more recent 2018 study shows that the bloodstains on the cloth are not correct, indicating that they were applied and did not flow from wounds. [Becky Little, "Shroud of Turin Isn’t Jesus’ Burial Cloth, Claims Forensic Study", 31 August 2018].

Historically, there is a letter written in 1390 from Bishop Pierre d'Arcis to the current Pope stating that the shroud was a forgery and that the man who created it had confessed to his work.

There is also the problem that Jesus' body was prepared in a different way than the Shroud of Turin depicts. "Nicodemus, who had first come to Him by night, also came, bringing a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about a hundred pounds weight. So they took the body of Jesus and bound it in linen wrappings with the spices, as is the burial custom of the Jews" (John 19:38-39). We can see the custom with Lazarus, who was "bound hand and foot with wrappings, and his face was wrapped around with a cloth" (John 11:44). Jesus, too, had a separate face cloth. "And so Simon Peter also came, following him, and entered the tomb; and he saw the linen wrappings lying there, and the face-cloth which had been on His head, not lying with the linen wrappings, but rolled up in a place by itself" (John 20:6-7). Take note that in addition to a face-cloth, there were multiple linen wrappings (the word is in the plural in Greek). I also wonder why there is no mention of the spices having permeated the shroud.

In the first-century, burials would have been done with plain weaved linen cloths. The Shroud of Turin is a complex herringbone twill weave that did not exist back in the first-century. [Joe Nickell, "Voice of Reason: The Truth Behind the Shroud of Turin," LiveScience.com, 18 March 2005].

What we have is a middle-ages rendition of what people thought Jesus looked like. It matches other artists' paintings in that period. It cannot serve as evidence of what Jesus truly looked like or tell us if Jesus had short or long hair.

If Paul thought long hair was bad, why did he take a Nazirite vow?

Jeffrey Hamilton — Tue, 18 Dec 2018 03:30:00 +0000

Question:

Thanks for the website. I read it all the time.

I have a question concerning men and long hair. I know that I Corinthians 11 talks about that. The first part of the chapter is written off by many as cultural, but I disagree with that view; however, in verse 14, it states it is a shame for a man to have long hair. This was written by Paul; yet, I read in Acts 18:18 that Paul is beginning a Nazirite vow in which he would let his hair grow long. I'm confused. Any commentary would help.

Thanks.

Answer:

"Paul, having remained many days longer, took leave of the brethren and put out to sea for Syria, and with him were Priscilla and Aquila. In Cenchrea he had his hair cut, for he was keeping a vow" (Acts 18:18).

The shaving of the head in connection with a vow is following the custom of the Nazirite vow (Numbers 6:2-21). The head is shaved at the beginning of the vow and again at the completion of the vow. Most Nazirite vows were not lifelong. Samson and John the Baptist were rare exceptions.

The Bible doesn't record why Paul chose to follow the Jewish practice for this particular vow, though we can make a reasonable guess. He stated he was heading to Jerusalem and wanted to be there in time for a particular feast (Acts 18:21 in the NKJV). Paul was well known in the Jewish circles as one who had abandoned their faith and had become a Christian. By following the custom of this vow, Paul was showing everyone that he had not changed that much, and it would provide an opportunity for him to talk to his brethren about the Christ. It was not that Paul thought that shaving the head was required for a vow. He saw it as something that made no difference and so it would do no harm to follow the custom and it would open doors of opportunity that he would not have otherwise. Even though he kept one part of the Nazirite vow, he would not have followed this type of vow completely. Along with the shaving of his head, the vow required abstaining from all grape products. As a Christian, Paul would not have done this if the vow lasted longer than a week because he would partake of the Lord's Supper on the first day of the week (Acts 20:7). That supper includes the fruit of the vine (grape juice).

If that is true, then "When he had landed at Caesarea, he went up and greeted the church, and went down to Antioch" (Acts 18:22), going "up" would refer to going to Jerusalem to visit the church there. It would be there that he would be at the temple where the vow could be completed by shaving his head for a second time.

Notice that the time between taking the vow and completing it would only have been a matter of several weeks, or perhaps a few months at most. This would not have been long enough time for his hair to grow long.

Why are we not supposed to cut the sides of our hair?

Jeffrey Hamilton — Thu, 19 Jan 2017 22:04:00 +0000

Question:

Why are we not supposed to cut the sides of our hair?

Answer:

"You shall not shave around the sides of your head, nor shall you disfigure the edges of your beard" (Leviticus 19:27).

The word that is translated as "shaved" means to strike off with violence, and the word rendered "disfigured" in this verse means to ruin, batter, or destroy. Therefore, this verse is not saying it is wrong to get a haircut or to trim your beard but is forbidding the disfiguring of your looks by chopping the hair to make yourself look ugly.

This was a heathen practice to show that a person was in mourning. "He has gone up to the temple and Dibon, to the high places to weep. Moab will wail over Nebo and over Medeba; on all their heads will be baldness, And every beard cut off" (Isaiah 15:2). "For every head shall be bald, and every beard clipped; on all the hands shall be cuts, and on the loins sackcloth" (Jeremiah 48:27). God is forbidding making a display of a person's grief.

It is similar to what He stated in regard to fasting. "Is it a fast that I have chosen, a day for a man to afflict his soul? Is it to bow down his head like a bulrush, and to spread out sackcloth and ashes? Would you call this a fast, and an acceptable day to the LORD?" (Isaiah 58:5). Instead, Jesus, like the Old Law, commanded people not to make a show of their grief. "Moreover, when you fast, do not be like the hypocrites, with a sad countenance. For they disfigure their faces that they may appear to men to be fasting. Assuredly, I say to you, they have their reward" (Mark 6:16).

The Old Law did not forbid cutting the hair because priests were told, "They shall neither shave their heads nor let their hair grow long; but they shall keep their hair well trimmed" (Ezekiel 44:20).

Is it a sin to shave off one’s beard?

Jeffrey Hamilton — Fri, 16 Sep 2016 02:47:00 +0000

Question:

Is it a sin to shave off one's beard? I heard an argument that God gave men beards to differentiate them from women and that they shouldn't shave them off because that's saying to God that He made a mistake on their faces?

Answer:

The problem is that the argument is not one that God made. God did have men distinguished from women by clothing: "A woman shall not wear anything that pertains to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman's garment, for all who do so are an abomination to the LORD your God" (Deuteronomy 22:5). They are also to be distinguished by their hair length: "Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him? But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her for a covering" (I Corinthians 11:14-15).

To say that men must wear beards puts men in the South Asia area and Native Americans at a disadvantage. Many lineages in that region do not have facial hair. God does not make rules that cannot be universally applied.

To argue that men should not cut what God gave them would run counter to the idea that men are to have short hair. Shaving just means a person is choosing to trim his beard to skin level.

Was the standard for priests to have short hair and trimmed beards?

Jeffrey Hamilton — Fri, 21 Mar 2014 02:48:00 +0000

Question:

I was wondering about Ezekiel 44:20, "They shall neither shave their heads nor let their hair grow long, but they shall keep their hair well-trimmed." I was wondering: Was this a standard for the priests before this time or was this instituted later? I can't seem to find it for the priests beforehand. But thought it was an interesting verse concerning short hair.

Answer:

See: Should a Christian shave his head for a dead relative?

God forbade the priests from making a show of their grief because they represented God before the people (Leviticus 10:6; 21:1-15; Ezekiel 24:16-17). To show grief would be a form of rebellion against what God decided about the life of another.

Should a Christian shave his head for a dead relative?

Jeffrey Hamilton — Sat, 23 Nov 2013 01:46:00 +0000

Question:

Should a Christian shave his head for a dead relative? Despite the fact that shaving the heads for the dead is forbidden in the Old Testament, should a Christian have anything to do with such practices?

Thank you for your time.

Answer:

"You shall not shave around the sides of your head, nor shall you disfigure the edges of your beard" (Leviticus 19:27).

The word that is translated as "shaved" in this translation means to strike off with violence and the word rendered "disfigured" in this verse means to ruin, batter, or destroy. Therefore, this verse is not saying it is wrong to get a haircut or to trim your beard but is forbidding the disfiguring of your looks by chopping your hair to make yourself look ugly.

This was a heathen practice to show that a person was in mourning.

"He has gone up to the temple and Dibon, to the high places to weep. Moab will wail over Nebo and over Medeba; on all their heads will be baldness, and every beard cut off" (Isaiah 15:2).
"For every head shall be bald, and every beard clipped; on all the hands shall be cuts, and on the loins sackcloth" (Jeremiah 48:37).

God was forbidding making a display of a person's grief. It is similar to what He stated in regards to fasting. "Is it a fast that I have chosen, a day for a man to afflict his soul? Is it to bow down his head like a bulrush, and to spread out sackcloth and ashes? Would you call this a fast, and an acceptable day to the LORD?" (Isaiah 58:5).

Jesus, like the Old Law, commanded people not to make a show of their grief. "Moreover, when you fast, do not be like the hypocrites, with a sad countenance. For they disfigure their faces that they may appear to men to be fasting. Assuredly, I say to you, they have their reward" (Matthew 6:16).

So the question is why is this tradition of shaving the head when a relative has died in existence? Is it there to make a show of a person's grief. Does it have some religious significance? Or is it just a tradition, like we have in my country of wearing black to a funeral?