Hair in History

Copyright by Lois Gibson

To support their view that a woman is not to cut her hair, some will tell you that in the Bible you will not find any reference showing a woman cutting her hair in a complimentary manner. They may admit that the Bible doesn't say much about hair at all, which is quite true. Some will say that this is "probably because the proper view has been so readily accepted in the past, having been an inbred lesson of nature." 1 Let us further examine these points.

HAIR REMOVAL IN THE BIBLE

From the words previously examined, few refer to cutting a woman's hair. We will now examine some of these Scriptures.

1. Numbers 6:9,18-19 show God's instructions for a man or woman to shave their head. This applied to those who had taken the vow of a Nazarite.

2. Leviticus 13:33 covers God's instructions for partly shaving the head of a man or woman when checking for leprosy.

3. Leviticus 14:8-9 again gives God's instructions for shaving off all the hair of a leper (man or woman) in their cleansing.

4. Deuteronomy 21:12 tells God's instructions for a woman to shave her head when an Israelite wanted to marry her after she was taken captive by them in war against their enemies. In the book quoted above, it is stated that "the ancient Israelites considered the shaving of a woman's head humbling to her (Deuteronomy 21:10-14)." 2 This same idea is expressed later in the book. A study of these Scriptures and how the word 'humbled' is used in other verses will show that the woman was 'humbled' because the man had sexual relations with her and the fact that her hair was shaved had nothing to do with this so called "process of humiliation." 3 If this reasoning is to be followed, then it would also be humbling to pare your nails, etc.

The word translated 'humbled' is 'anah.' It is translated this way seven times and 'humble' four times. Take some time to compare how this word is used in the following Scriptures (bold lettering is mine):

"Behold, here is my daughter a maiden, and his concubine; them I will bring out now, and humble ye them, and do with them what seemeth good unto you: but unto this man do not so vile a thing." Judges 19:24 (KJV)

"Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you. ...Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days." Deuteronomy 22:24,29 (KJV)

"In thee have they discovered their fathers' nakedness: in thee have they humbled her that was set apart for pollution. And one hath committed abomination with his neighbour's wife; and another hath lewdly defiled his daughter in law; and another in thee hath humbled his sister, his father's daughter." Ezekiel 22:10,11 (KJV)

The acts described in Deuteronomy 21:10-14 were not part of any "process of humiliation." The woman was not disgraced, but was humbled through the sexual act. Read this passage again now that it is clear what humble meant.

"When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the LORD thy God hath delivered them into thine hands, and thou hast taken them captive, And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife; Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house; and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails; And she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and shall remain in thine house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month: and after that thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife. And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her at all for money, thou shalt not make merchandise of her, because thou hast humbled her." (KJV)

5. Isaiah 3:24 shows God saying he would give the women of Judah baldness instead of well set hair due to their haughtiness. This does refer  metaphorically to the act in an unfavorable manner, but is only in reference to totally removing the hair and not merely cutting. This was to be done by God, not the woman.

6. I Corinthians 11:5,6 speaks of shaving a woman's hair if she did not wear a covering when praying or prophesying. This also refers to the act in an unfavorable manner, yet it does not show it being done. (The meanings of 'shorn' and 'shaven' are discussed elsewhere in detail.)

7. Jeremiah 7:29 shows God saying "cut off thine hair" because the people of Judah were following other gods. (Some non-Israelites would shave their heads in allegiance to their god.) This metaphorically refers to the act in an unfavorable manner, but it would be in reference to both men and women totally removing the hair and not merely cutting. The Hebrew word used for 'hair' in this passage was only used one time as 'hair.' The definition is "prop. something set apart, i.e. (abstr.) dedication (of a priest or Nazarite); hence (concr.) unshorn locks; also (by impl.) a chaplet (espec. of royalty)." 4 'Cut' is "gazaz," the same word which was also translated 'shaved,' 'shear,' 'shearers' and 'shearing.' (This is discussed elsewhere.) It means "a prim. root [akin to 1468]; to cut off; spec. to shear a flock, or shave the hair; fig. to destroy an enemy." 5 It is clear that the total removal of hair was meant, just as at the end of a Nazarite vow.

I believe that God was saying for them to remove their hair as they were no longer separated to God due to their spiritual adultery. Since they were showing by their actions that they were no longer consecrated to God, they should also shave their head to show their vow to God was over. No, everyone had not literally taken a vow of the Nazarite, but the Israelites were to be separated unto God. They were not to defile themselves by worshipping other gods. This Scripture cannot be used to support the belief that women never cut their hair. If this logic is to be followed, then the men never cut their hair either!

8. One Scripture which has been used to show it was a shame for a woman to cut her hair is found in Numbers 5:18:

"And the priest shall set the woman before the Lord, and uncover the woman's head, and put the offering of memorial in her hands, which is the jealousy offering: and the priest shall have in his hand the bitter water that causeth the curse:" (KJV)

It would be embarrassing for a woman to go through this ceremony when she was accused of committing adultery. This happened when there was no witness, but the husband became jealous. It also happened if the husband became jealous and she had not committed adultery.

I do not believe that this verse shows that the woman's hair was shaved. The word translated 'uncover' is "para" and means "a prim. root; to loosen; by impl. to expose, dismiss; fig. absolve, begin." 6 It is rendered as 'loosen' or 'unbind' in some versions.

There were certain times where a woman's head would be shaved as we have studied, yet I would not consider them all a 'shame,' especially with regard to the Nazarite vow. The biblical punishment for a woman caught in adultery was death, not the shaving of her head. The instructions in Numbers was for when there was just a suspicion or the act was committed without witnesses.

There are not many references to a woman's hair in the Bible. One cannot assume it was or was not cut simply because it is not mentioned. Even if it were not done, there is a big difference in it being a custom as compared to a biblical command. Since some use secular history to support this teaching, let us now look at the historical perspective, even though this cannot be used to say it is or is not condoned by God.

THE HISTORY OF HAIR

In a book widely used to promote this teaching, the author states that "For thousands of years, society has frowned upon the cutting of hair by women. Speaking in very broad terms, it is only since the turn of the twentieth century that the practice has gained and held any wide acceptance." 7 We will now look at what some reference books have to say about the subject. With the exception of the first, I will try to limit comments to those concerning women cutting their hair, with a few comments on men with long hair. One will soon see that the author was speaking in very broad terms, indeed.

1. "From the earliest days of colonization through the early part of the 20th century, American hair styles of both men and women were strongly influenced by European fashion. ...Women's hair styles became somewhat more sensible in the early 1700's. The hair was worn close to the head and often adorned with gray or white powder. Some sixty years later, architectural innovation again took hold, and hair was arranged around elaborate structures of wire or basketry and adorned with flowers, feathers, fruit, and even small sculptures. About 1800, women's hair became shorter, and soon after, side curls appeared. ...In 1905, Charles Nessler, a German living in England, introduced the permanent wave... Three years later the permanent wave was imported into the United States... Originally only hair that conformed to the recommended length of three feet was permanently waved. But about 1915 the dancer Irene Castle became a fixture in American culture... In the 1960's and 1970's, many women adopted hair styles that were freer and less formalized and lacked elaborateness. Wigs returned to the fashion scene..." 8

2. "Early records indicate that the ancient Assyrians wore elaborate curly hair styles; by contrast, the ancient Egyptians, men and women alike, shaved their heads and wore wigs. Whether ornate or simple, hairdressing has been employed by very nearly every society." 9

3. "Both Egyptian men (who were beardless) and women shaved their heads for coolness. ...The Hebrews were prohibited by biblical law from cutting their hair or beards. Thus, following ancient tradition, Orthodox Jewish men through the centuries have worn long hair and beards. After the exile, in the 1st century AD, Orthodox women, upon marriage, cropped their hair and wore wigs, a custom which is still practiced to some extent.

Among the ancient Greeks, boys under the age of 18 generally wore the hair long;... The Germanic and Celtic tribes of northern Europe wore long hair and beards; short hair was a mark of slavery or of punishment. In Islamic countries, both men and women continue to follow tradition, concealing their hair in public under headcloths, turbans, fezzes, or veils. ...By the 9th century, European noblemen wore their hair cropped at the neck, and women's hair was long and generally plaited; married noblewomen, following the church's stipulations about modesty, covered these plaits with a veil. ...Fashionable women of the 13th and 14th centuries coiled their plaits over their ears or bundled them up in back, in both cases covered with gold net cauls or with linen drapery, surmounted by a veil. In the courts of 15th century France and the Netherlands, women plucked their foreheads to give an effect of added height and combed the rest of their hair under huge wimples draped with veiling. ...In the early 17th century European men of fashion wore long flowing Cavalier locks, often curled, piled, and perfumed. ...In the 18th century...Women at first wore very short powdered hair, curled or waved, but by the 1770s they had adopted a style of combing their hair up into lofty constructions of wire, pads, and false hair, powdered and variously decorated. ...It became fashionable for women after World War I to wear bobbed hair, often permanently waved. ...For men, the closely cropped crew cuts adopted for practical reasons during World War II gave way to longer hair and untrimmed beards." 10

4. "Since prehistoric times, people have cut, braided, and dyed their hair and changed it in other ways as well. ...In ancient Egypt, both men and women shaved their heads for cleanliness and relief from the heat. ...Most men of the 1600's had long, flowing curls. ...During the 1940's, many women cut their hair in a short style called the bob and had it permanent-waved." 11

5. "Almost all societies have found it necessary to cut or confine the hair in order to keep it out of the way. ...As a sign of mourning the ancient Egyptians, whose heads were usually shaven, grew long hair, and long-haired Hindu widows cut off their hair. ...Egyptian noblemen and noblewomen clipped their hair close; later, for coolness and cleanliness in the hot climate they shaved their heads with bronze razors. ...Among the Masai, for example, nonwarriors and women shaved their heads while warriors tied their front hair into three sections of tiny braids and their back hair into a waist-length queue. ...Ibo girls, who shaved their heads and thereafter let the hair grow only according to an elaborate pattern chalked on their skulls. ...In the 15th century, fashionable ladies of Northern Europe plucked their hairline to make their foreheads seem higher... 19th century...Both men and women cut their hair very short, like the Roman emperors, or women twisted their hair into Greek knots, with short curls framing the face, or later into smooth plaits around the head. ...As a result of World War I, women everywhere cut or "bobbed" their hair as a symbol of their political and social emancipation. There followed a succession of short, headclinging hair styles inspired by film stars- the page boy of Garbo, the peek-a-boo of Veronica Lake. Short hair greatly increased the popularity of the permanent wave... In the 1950's the invention of rollers for waving made possible the very short, layered Italian cut. As young, active, informal women discarded hats, hair styles- boufant styles and the smooth, geometric cuts- became important." 12

From what I have been able to study on the history of hair, it does not seem that society has looked down upon women cutting their hair for thousands of years, nor that it was a disgrace for centuries, nor that for thousands of years in almost every society has it been proper for men to cut their hair and women to not cut their hair at all. This was not the general policy for all time and all peoples. I am convinced that the more one would research this subject, the more instances they would find to show these ideas to be false.

Yes, there were times when it was frowned upon, but throughout the years society's opinions on hair styling has changed and no doubt will continue to change just as it has on other issues. According to the Dictionary of American History, quoted earlier, "One Joseph Palmer, who died in 1840, has inscribed on his tombstone in Leominster, Mass., 'Persecuted for growing the beard.' A scant twenty years later, beards were regarded as symbols of sincerity and solidity." 13

Remember when you were younger and thought that article of clothing or that certain style of eyeglasses was so cool? My, you thought you were hot! Years later, in looking back at old photographs, you cringe to think you ever wore it, let alone liked it! Hair styling, length of hair and facial hair seem to have gone through many changes during different times and in different cultures and apparently will continue to do so.

HAIR HISTORY FROM BIBLICAL REFERENCES

Lets' explore what some biblical references have to say about the subject.

1. The New Smith's Bible Dictionary states that "care and styling of the hair was a matter of custom in the Bible, and it also had religious significance. It was sometimes dressed with aromatic ointments... Cutting and tearing the hair were signs of grief...in a time of war or national calamity. But Israelites were forbidden to trim around the temples (Lev. 19:27) or cut the hair when a relative died (Deut. 14:1) because of the association of these practices with pagan rites. The hair was associated with strength...and purity; and not cutting the hair was considered a sign of consecration to God by the Nazarites (Num. 6:5)." 14

2. Today's Dictionary Of The Bible says "Among the Greeks the custom in this respect varied at different times, as it did also among the Romans. In the time of the apostle, among the Greeks the men wore short hair, while that of the women was long (I Cor. 11:14,15). Paul reproves the Corinthians for falling in with a style of manners which so far confounded the distinction of the sexes and was detrimental to good morals. ...In New Testament times the natural distinction between the sexes was preserved by the women wearing long hair...while the men preserved theirs as a rule at a moderate length by frequent clipping." 15

3. The New Bible Dictionary: Second Edition tells that "The normal Israelite custom, for both sexes, seems to have been to let the hair grow to considerable length. ...Barbers are mentioned (Ezk. 5:1), but their function was to trim rather than to crop the hair. But by the NT period long hair was a 'shame' to a man (I Cor. 11:14), although Paul made that statement to a church in Greece. Women, on the other hand, wore the hair long and practically uncut in both periods. The Talmud does mention women's hairdressers, but the root of the word...is 'to plait' rather than 'to cut'. ...In Egypt the head and face were shaved, however, and Joseph had to comply with the local customs (Gn. 41:14). ...The trimming of it had to be done in special ways; the forelock must never be cut (Lv. 19:27), since this was a feature of some idolatrous cults... To this day orthodox Jews observe this custom: small boys can be seen with the whole head cropped close, except for the ringlets hanging at the ears. The priests were given instructions about their hair by Ezekiel (44:20). The Nazarite had to leave his hair untrimmed so long as his vow lasted, and then shave it completely. This shaving signified purification (Lv. 14:8)."

Regarding women, it says "Paul dealt with the local situation in the churches by requiring that the conventions of the time be observed. Meanwhile he laid down the principle that 'God shows no partiality' and that in Christ 'there is neither male nor female', since Christians 'are all one in Christ Jesus (Gal. 3:28)." 16

4. The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible notes "the ancients usually wore their hair long, although priests, warriors and young boys often were shaved. Boys left a side lock. Recall the long hair of Samson and Absalom. Because the hair was shaved in an initiation to a divinity in Arabia, the cutting of hair was an abomination to the Jews (Jer. 49:32). The Nazarite knew that the whole body belonged to God including the hair, so a razor never touched his skin (Judg 16:17) until his service was ended (Num 6:18). Captive women shaved their heads for purification, also the lepers (Lev 14:8). Priests kept their hair at a moderate length (Ezek 44:20), but were forbidden to make tonsures (Lev 21:5). ...By NT times long hair was degrading to man, but to a woman it was a source of pride (I Cor 11:14). ...Loss of hair to a woman was shameful (I Cor 11:6). Women were warned against elaborate hair dressing (I Pet 3:3)." 17

5. The Dictionary of the Bible says "OT allusions show that men wore the hair long... the hair, however, was occasionally cut. ...To cut the hair and beard short was a dishonor (2 S 10:4). The hair and beard were cut short as a sign of mourning... This practice was followed by both men and women. The hair was cut with a knife. ...Women, it seems, generally wore the hair loose, hanging down the back below the shoulders. It was sometimes bound by a band around the temples and was worn long in tresses or sometimes in braids. ...In NT times the styles of hairdressing were much the same among Palestinian Jews as in OT times. Men and women wore the hair long, and men wore the full beard. ...the Roman styles of hairdressing of the 1st century bore a rather close resemblance to modern styles. ...Paul in speaking to the Corinthians accepts the Roman rather than the Palestinian style and says it is degrading for a man to wear his hair long (I Cor. 11:14). He admits also that it is becoming for a woman to cultivate and dress her hair, which is her glory (ibid). For a woman to have her hair cut short or her head shaved is a disgrace (I Co 11:5f); possibly the short haircut was a token of the prostitute." 18

6. The Bible Almanac tells that "Paul the apostle said that hair was a natural veil, or covering, for the woman; he indicates that in his day it was shameful for a Christian woman to cut her hair (I Cor. 11:15). The women wore their hair long and braided." 19

QUESTIONS

Does the Bible give any complimentary mention of women cutting their hair? Not that I could find, but I also have not found a negative mention showing a woman cutting her own hair. Proponents of the 'no cutting' doctrine would therefore state that there wouldn't be any mention as women never cut their hair. Based on what I have been able to study, I do not believe anyone can assuredly state that this was never done. It would appear it was seldom done among the Israelites. This, however, does not constitute a biblical prohibition of the act. If the Bible does not have much to say about a person's hair and it is believed that this is "probably because the proper view has been so readily accepted in the past, having been an inbred lesson of nature," 20 then I must ask some questions.

1. If it was so 'inbred' in the women, how come the men, who were the spiritual leaders in the household, did not have this same knowledge 'inbred' in them with regard to their hair?

2. If the cutting of a woman's hair is so wrong and carries such implications, then why is it not once clearly and explicitly stated that doing so is wrong? Murder, adultery, lying and other wrongful actions are clearly mentioned time and again throughout Scripture. Should we not realize that these things are wrong to do without having them pointed out, as with hair? Yet they are specifically stated more than once in many parts of the Bible. Why? God wanted to make it extremely clear that such actions were sinful and that a follower of his should not engage in such as they lead to hell and not heaven. In addition, we see biblical examples of people in the Bible committing various acts of sin and not once do we ever read about a woman cutting her hair and it is known to be sinful.  I find it utterly impossible to believe that if it is sinful, that not one woman in Old Testament times ever committed this act, being so inbred, though women committed adultery, lied, and stole, among other things.

3. In the Corinthian church, which had many problems, would Paul really assume that they were so grounded on the issue of hair? I find this quite difficult to believe when these people were getting drunk while celebrating the Lord's supper, conducting services which were not decent and orderly, divisions were among them, and incest was being committed, among other things. Even Paul said he had to speak to the Corinthians "as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ." (I Cor. 3:1) If the issue of hair carries such importance, Paul would never have assumed such a group of believers needed no instructions on the matter.

4. Was God short sighted that he could not see ahead to the controversy and struggle with the hair issue in the 20th century and not include clear commandments against a woman cutting her hair? Surely if this were important to God, and knowing that women would freely cut their hair at a later point in history, wouldn't he have made certain that the matter was mentioned throughout his Word, just like he did with cheating, lying, and other sin?

THE WOMEN'S MOVEMENT

What does the issue of the women's movement have to do with the issue of women's hair? It was stated that the "practice of cutting the hair of women was a worldly, sinful one, born out of the desire of women to 'break the chains' of responsibility to male authority. It was not introduced to our generation by a preacher, but by a dancer!" 21 Prior to this statement, the question is asked whose idea it was that a woman should be free to cut her hair. "Was a spiritual revival behind the flapper movement of the twenties? Did a Godly man or woman receive a revelation from above that cutting of women's hair should now be acceptable, after centuries of being a disgrace? Of course not." 22

We have already discussed the history of hair and have seen that it was cut or shaven in different societies at various times. Nobody would say or believe (I hope) that a spiritual revival was behind the flapper movement. However, I do not know that Irene Castle was involved in the women's liberation movement. She and her husband were ballroom dancers. Why did she bob her hair? I do not know her motive and she is not alive to defend herself. (Note: Bobbed hair was not just hair that was cut, but hair that was cut short.)

However, I did find a little information about her in the book, Notable American Women The Modern Period. "Irene Castle attributed their success to the fact that they were 'young, clean, married and well-mannered.' Credit must also be given to Irene Castle's appearance: extraordinarily graceful, slim and boyish, dressed in expensive but simple fashions, she was a refreshing change from the jewel-bedecked, elaborately dressed ladies of fashion. ...The Castles gave to the 'dance craze' an aura of elegance and respectability. ...Yet they de-emphasized the sensuality of the dances, playing up instead their grace and their value as exercise. Irene Castle also had a tremendous influence on fashion. In emulation of her, women across the country bobbed their hair and adopted the headache band, the little Dutch cap, and the light, floating 'Castle frocks.'" 23 The book also notes that she attended National Park Seminary but didn't graduate.

If anything is done out of rebellion it is wrong, yet that does not mean the act itself is wrong. It may or may not be wrong or sinful. Much of what we do revolves around our motive and the spirit in which it is done. It is a fact that hair trends change. Sometimes a hair style, etc. is accepted by society and other times it is not. Later, the same style could be acceptable. This does not mean that if hair was cut due to rebellion at one time in history that anyone who does so now is doing it in like manner. As with the earlier example on beards, at one point in the 1800s in America it wasn't considered proper, yet not much later it was looked upon in a favorable manner. One cannot say that all beards are wrong because at one time they were unacceptable by society or grown out of rebellion.

I believe that if something you want to do would presently associate you with something ungodly or would put your Christian reputation at stake, you should not do it. It might not be wrong in and of itself. A woman having her hair cut now does not associate herself with the women's liberation movement. She is not looked upon as being immoral. I know of no stigma attached to this except within some churches.

A BRIEF LOOK IN THE PAST

Why would something have to start from a godly person with a revelation in order for it to be acceptable? Other things are done or used by Christians which were not started by godly people. (I am not speaking about things which are clearly wrong in Scripture.) Is everything else we are allowed or not allowed to do judged in this same manner?

How do we explain the time in Pentecostal movements when radio was rejected as vehemently as television is today, yet is accepted now? Television sets are disapproved because they display evil. So do radios.

How do we also explain that wearing open toed shoes was once unacceptable, but is okay today? What about wearing the color red? These teachings were not started by 'worldly' people; they were godly people. Yet, we find changes in these standards. Were they first revelations from God? If so, why did they change? If not, why were they imposed upon people? Could some teachings have been cultural?

This is not being said to belittle or ridicule those who did or may still hold these beliefs. I do not doubt that many, perhaps all, who preached these standards were quite sincere and believed these things would be detrimental to the Christian. If a person feels something is wrong, they should not do it. This applies whether or not it is Bible doctrine. Something might be wrong for me, which may not be wrong for you, simply because it effects me adversely. This does not mean that it is wrong for everyone, nor that it should be preached as a church standard.

In talking about building fences, Jerry Bridges tells of a family trip to a different beach, where he discovered very scantily clad women. After a brief time, he went to his car, thus avoiding temptation. He goes on to say, "Now suppose, because of my experience, I concluded that going to the beach would always lead to sin. I could have said to my son, 'You are not to go to the beach anymore.' I could have begun to look down my religious nose at others who went to the beach. I would have built a permanent fence: 'Thou shalt not go to the beach.' In due time that fence would have had almost the same force in my thinking as the Ten Commandments, especially as I would use it to judge or influence others. That is the way a lot of manmade 'do's and don'ts' originate. They begin as a sincere effort to deal with real sin issues. But very often we begin to focus on the fence we've built instead of the sin it was designed to guard against. We fight our battle in the wrong places; we deal with externals instead of the heart." 24

On the other hand, God's standards are unchangeable and should be preached to all. They do not change with the times. Though places may legalize homosexuality, it will still be wrong biblically. That will never change.

What then changed these and other teachings? Was it a biblical revelation in the beginning? It does not appear to be since the teaching has changed. Could it have been cultural? The manner in which I have heard the shoes and red clothing explained it appear they were. Sometimes we can be overly zealous in our walk with God and incorporate man made teachings into God's doctrine. This is exactly what Jesus said of the Pharisees and scribes when he told them that they taught as doctrine the commandments of men. They elevated these things to be equal or above God's commandments. Outwardly, these men appeared righteous, but Jesus warned his disciples to beware of the doctrine of the Pharisees. They were in the habit of building too many fences.

.....

Footnotes:

1 Daniel L. Segraves, Women's Hair: The Long and Short of It (Dupo: The Good Word, 1979), 14.

2 Ibid., 6.

3 Ibid., 41.

4 James Strong, S.T.D., LL. D., Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of The Bible (Nashville: Abingdon, 1980), 77 Hebrew dictionary.

5 Ibid., 28 Hebrew dictionary.

6 Ibid., 97 Hebrew dictionary.

7 Daniel L. Segraves, Women's Hair: The Long and Short of It (Dupo: The Good Word, 1979), 15.

8 Dictionary of American History, Revised ed., vol. III (New York: C. Scribner's Sons, 1976), 239.

9 Britannica Micropaedia Ready Reference, Volume 5, 1992 ed., s.v. "Hairdressing," 622.

10 Funk & Wagnalls New Encyclopedia, Volume 12, 1993 ed., s.v. "Hairdressing," 331-333.

11 The World Book Encyclopedia, 1993 ed., s.v. "Hairdressing," 11,12.

12 Encyclopedia Americana Deluxe Library Edition, Volume 13, 1990 ed., s.v. "Hairdressing," 691-695.

13 Dictionary of American History, Revised ed., vol. III (New York: C. Scribner's Sons, 1976), 239.

14 William Smith, The New Smith's Bible Dictionary, Revised ed. (Garden City: Doubleday-Galilee Book, 1966), 131-132.

15 Compiled by T.A. Bryant, Today's Dictionary Of The Bible (Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 1982), 275.

16 The New Bible Dictionary: Second Edition, Edited by JD Douglas, FF Bruce, JI Packer, et. al., Revised ed. (1962; reprint, Wheaton: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., 1986), 449, 1259.

17 The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, General editor Merrill C. Tenney, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids: The Zondervan Corporation, 1976), 15-16.

18 John L. McKenzie, S.J., Dictionary of the Bible (New York: Macmillan Co., 1965), 331-333.

19 The Bible Almanac, Edited by J.I. Packer, Merrill C. Tenney, William White, Jr. (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1980), 484.

20 See footnote number 1.

21 Daniel L. Segraves, Women's Hair: The Long and Short of It (Dupo: The Good Word, 1979), 17.

22 Ibid.

23 Notable American Women The Modern Period: A Biographical Dictionary, Edited by Barbara Sicherman & Carol Hurd Green, et. al. (Cambridge: Belknap Press, 1980), 142-143.

24 Jerry Bridges, Transforming Grace: Living Confidently in God's Unfailing Love (Colorado Springs: NavPress, 1991), 123.

You may write Lois at the email address displayed in the image. No correspondence that seeks to debate will be answered as I have no desire to debate. Understand that due to the volume of mail, not every email may be acknowledged.
Email address



Hair: An Introduction     Hair in History    Regular Dictionary Definitions     Shorn and Shaven

Different Bible Versions     Modern Day Scribes & Pharisees   Labeling


HOME / CONTACT / HOW DO I HELP? / OLD FEEDBACK / EXPERIENCES / UPC MEMBERS SPEAK / ARTICLES / BOOKS / ISSUES / LOIS' WRITINGS / ORGANIZATIONS / OTHER SITES /
WHY THIS SITE? / STATEMENT OF BELIEFS / WHAT IS SPIRITUAL ABUSE? / OPEN LETTER /
UPC BELIEFS / HISTORY OF UPC / APOSTOLIC CONGRESS / DEVOTIONALS/  SUPPORT GROUP/

Established
August 23, 1997
Page added April 24, 2003
Copyright © 1997-2012 by Lois E. Gibson
Contents of this web site and all original works are copyright - All rights reserved. The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of the owner.