What Does the Bible Say about Facial Hair?

Summary

Summary prepared by Acts 2:38 Life from the transcript below — the preacher’s words follow in full.

Three teachers — Bible, pastor, conscience — and Christian liberty

• The question posed (in the host's frame): one of the most frequently asked questions, that you receive on your social media platforms, is: what does the bible say, about facial hair on men? Now, anybody who's been around the oneness pentecostal movement, for any length of time, knows that this is somewhat of a controversial topic, in some circles. I'd like you to start by explaining the backstory. Because there's probably some people that are listening to this, and they're saying: why is facial hair controversial? So i'd like you to just share your experience, and why this has been such a hotly debated topic. And then follow that up, if you would, by explaining: what does the bible actually say, about the subject? The answer: this question relates to personal choices, for our lives, and for our appearance. It's interesting, because of apostolic people — oneness pentecostal people — are one of the few groups today that say: our dress, and our appearance, is important to god. It is an aspect of holiness. It's a small part, compared to the big picture. Our life of morality, and the fruit of the spirit, is obviously the core of holiness. But what we wear, and how we dress, how we present ourselves to the public, is of concern, and interest, to god. He does have some guidelines for that. And that's another topic. But since we're one of the few groups that still believe that, then of course these questions do become important, for us. So whenever we talk about questions of practical holiness, or outward appearance: i say there are three teachers. The first, of all, is the bible. Whatever the bible teaches is authoritative. If the bible says do this, or don't do this, that's end of subject. Sometimes the bible gives direct commands. Or it has principles, that we apply. Sometimes the bible speaks consistently approvingly, of something. Or consistently disapproving. And even though there may not be an explicit command: if it's solely approving, or solely disapproving, that gives us a pretty strong indication. But then, there are some cases where the bible gives some examples, that might be approving, or some that might be disapproving, depending on the context. Or, you know, the bible might give us two different examples, of opposite conduct. And both of it is with approval ('both of its with approval', as heard). So that indicates: it's a matter of personal choice. It's not a matter of scriptural precedent. It's not a matter of command. But in addition to the bible, we have our pastor, and other godly teachers. Now, they don't have authority to add to, or take away from, god's word. But they help us apply god's word, in our context. And then third, we have our own conscience. Again, we don't have the authority to add to, or take away from, god's word. And god doesn't want us to oppose spiritual authority, or our pastor. But in the context, we have our own choice. God leaves a lot of things to us. Romans (the chapter as he gives it) explains christian liberty: that when the bible is neutral about something, or when the bible doesn't speak about something, or the bible gives us a choice: then we have christian liberty. So one christian could do one thing, one christian do another. So one might be a vegetarian. One might eat meat. Both are acceptable to god. One should not condemn the other. One should not ridicule the other. So that's the basis of christian liberty. So i'm giving you a foundation, when we answer a question like this. We first look: what does the bible say? Second: what does our pastor advise? And then third: what does our own conscience say? So if any of those three give us direction, then i think we should follow it. So if you feel personally convicted (of) something — even though i don't — then you should follow your conviction. But you shouldn't condemn me, when i don't have that conviction ('but you should condemn me when i don't have that conviction', as the negation drops in the hearing). Because we're not talking about scripture here. We're talking about personal conviction. Or: you're attending a church. Your pastor has asked for the people (of) the church, to follow this guideline. Or maybe it's for leadership. Or for those (on) the platform, representing the whole church. So he might not think something is a sin, or against god's word. But he might think that — for the sake of the witness, in the community, or the sake of leadership, or circumstances — he's asking everybody to follow. Then you should follow it. And then of course the bible: whatever the bible teaches, that should go, for every one of us. So, to answer the question, i'm going to say: follow your conscience. Follow your pastor. Follow the bible. So anything else i say: i'm not trying to contradict any of that, that i've just said. Okay? I just want to make that, as a foundation.

Scriptures: Romans 14

What the Bible says — it speaks both ways

• Now then, the question becomes: well, what does the bible say? It's interesting: sometimes the bible speaks, and presents men's facial hair — men growing a beard ('men growing a mirrored', as heard) — in a favorable way. So psalm (the psalm as he gives it): aaron, the high priest, had a beard. Isaiah is a prophecy, of the messiah. It appears that jesus had a beard, at least long enough that the hairs could be plucked out, when he was arrested and crucified. At the same time, in genesis, the bible speaks of joseph shaving, before he went before pharaoh. Because apparently that was appropriate, in that custom. So the bible speaks of shaving, favorably. So here you have an example, where the bible speaks of both — men growing facial hair, and shaving facial hair ('facial air', as heard, at the second point) — approvingly, or positively. I've had some people say: well, you know, it's a god-given distinction, between male and female. Therefore, a man must wear facial hair. I don't see that as required. And, as i just gave you an example from the bible, my counter argument would be: whether you shave or not, the beard (shadow) is visibly different. So a man's shaved face is still very different, from a woman's face ('a woman-shaped face', as heard). Because of the beard. So whether you shave it or not, it is an important distinction, between male and female. And certainly, in our day, when you have this distinction being under attack: i do appreciate the idea that people want — that a man would want to be definitely masculine. That's a good thought, and a good idea. Now, what about the upci? It's interesting: the upci has never taken an official stand, in any of our documents. And of course, around the world, we've had many different practices, all throughout. I remember: i grew up in korea. In that culture, traditionally — at least the time i was there, the 60s and 70s — men would invariably shave. But then, when they reached a retirement age, then the more traditional men would grow a beard. And so all of our preachers were shaved ('were saved', as heard), except for one elderly gentleman. Who — he lived through the japanese occupation. He was persecuted, for being a christian, by the japanese. He came into the apostolic faith ('the apples like faith', as heard). He was one of our pastors. Well, when he reached in his 60s, he grew a beard. Nobody even thought anything of it. Because that was the culture.

Scriptures: Psalm 133; Isaiah (book-only); Genesis (book-only)

A cultural issue — the hippie badge and the Austin cases

• Now, more specifically, to your point: in america — so, i'm what i'm getting at is ('in a mirror so so i'm what i'm getting at', as heard at the turn) — it's not really a biblical issue. It's a cultural issue. Is: what does it signify, in your culture? So, when you go back to the 1800s, facial hair was very common, in america. Early 1900s, facial hair was very common. Even among the apostolic pioneers, the pioneers of the upci. But in the early part of the 20th century, again, facial hair was somewhat common. Or, you know, we have many examples. But what really happened: most people started shaving. Especially in — we're talking about white middle class america, now. Among ethnic minorities, there was not always the same connotation. But among what i would call the middle class white americans — which were the vast majority, say by the 1940s, 1950s — it was typical, for a man, to shave. Well, the hippie movement arose, to rebel against traditional culture, in the 60s and 70s. So, as part of that, the hippies would grow facial hair. And often the men would grow very long hair ('very long here', as heard). Which does contradict god's word. And they were very explicit: we're rejecting our culture. Down with the establishment. So they made it very clear, that we're doing this because we're in rebellion. And they associated it with the use of drugs, sexual promiscuity, and so forth. So, for many — in, again, white middle class america, now talking about the 1960s, 1970s — if you saw a person, particularly a young person, young man, with facial hair: you pretty much would assume they're in rebellion. They deny traditional values. They deny christian teaching. They're probably using illegal drugs. They're probably sexually promiscuous. That is their badge, of their identity. So our churches, of that time, were successful in winning many of these people, to the lord. So when they came to the lord, many of them — as a matter of personal conviction, nobody even had to tell them — they would shave. Why? Because that was a badge of their old life. And now that they're (in) a new life, they wanted to change their identification. Like changing your uniform. And if they didn't immediately, generally the pastor would teach them: now you're part of a new life, you've got to get rid of your old life. And so it became part of holiness. Not that the facial hair itself was a sin. But (because of) the cultural connotation. So i mentioned the three teachers: the bible, the pastor and other mentors, leaders, and the conscience. And so two of those three would definitely say: you need to make a change. So that's our culture. So while the upci has never had an official position — and the reason why we didn't is: because if you look across the world, that's not a uniform phenomenon. And if you look at our own history — upci, or oneness history, as well as american western culture — it hasn't been uniform. But it's been specific. So therefore, the upci never felt the need, to make any official statement. However, i would say: going back to the 60s, 70s, 80s, in the aftermath of that: the vast majority of our churches would have — either by personal conscience, or pastoral guidance — would not have wanted facial hair. Because they wouldn't want to be misrepresented. Now, of course, we're now living in the 21st century ('in the 20th century', as spoken). We're far removed from the hippies. And so, when i talk to young people, they don't even know what i'm talking about. I faced this issue, when i started the church in austin, texas — a very liberal city — in 1992. And i immediately saw, in that culture, at that time, that place: if a man had facial hair, it made no significance ('it made no significant', as heard). It communicated nothing specific. He might be homeless. He might be a bank president. You wouldn't know. And even his casual dress wouldn't tell you. So that was the culture, that i was starting a new church in. Obviously, i was trying to establish new people. And i faced issues of sexual promiscuity, drug addiction, and all the sins that are common, in our society. And of course the teachings of holiness: modesty of dress, avoiding ornamentation and jewelry, men cutting their hair short, ladies letting their hair grow long. So i had to teach all those things. Well, what's my authority? The word of god. Well, one of my early converts had a mustache. Really, in my culture, i couldn't say it had any significance. His wife had never even seen him without a mustache. I couldn't really see it was a biblical issue. So i'm trying to get these people to change their dress, and change their lifestyle, by appealing to the bible. So i didn't have anything to appeal to. So i just ignored it. I never brought it up. Another example: i had a man, that had been converted as a hippie, in the 60s, in new york. Came in one of our churches. And so he immediately shaved. Well, he later backslid, divorced, remarried. He ended up, many years later, now in our church in austin. Prayed through. His new wife is there. He has a full beard. So he asked me what i thought. So i kind of gave him a brief synopsis, just like i gave you. He says: well, my wife — my new wife — has no clue of the background. She absolutely doesn't want me to shave. You know, i'm trying to explain to her, but she doesn't understand. So i gave him that little synopsis. So he came back, the next service, completely shaved. I was a little surprised. And i said: well, why did you do that? He said: well, you know, you talked about personal conviction. He said: when i first came in the church, this was my conviction. I was trying to make a change, my whole life. He said: now that i'm coming back into church, being renewed, i just feel like i should go back, and make my first consecration. So that was his choice. I had another man — african-american, who was actually a credential minister. And his facial hair was very curly, and curled in. And he had some problems, with infection, in the pores. So once, when he was shaving, he cut himself. And that led to an infection. Led to a blood disease. And he was very sick. And almost died. Well, he recovered. And his doctor advised him: don't shave. Because you're high risk, of cutting yourself. And then, once you cut yourself, you're at high risk of another infection. This time, it could be fatal. So he came to me. And he says: brother bernard, i want to comply with everything. But i feel like, if i could just grow a just slight beard, enough that it's off of my face. And i'll keep it trimmed, and shaved. Because this is what my doctor has told me to do. Says: what do you think? I said: well, i went through the same kind of thing. It's just really a personal conviction. And you have a reason. It's not related to rebellion, or immorality. But i said: you are a credential minister. So, as far as our church is concerned, it will not make any signal. But if you're asked to preach (at) another church: ask that pastor. Tell that pastor the situation. And ask for their advice. And if they think that would be misunderstood, to their congregation — that you're in rebellion, or you're abandoning holiness, or anything like that — then you just have a choice: either you shave, in order to minister there. Or you decline to minister there. Because we have to respect that pastor.

The stumbling block — and being faithful to your calling

• And there, i was following romans (the chapter already carried in this record's first section). Which: if something would be an offense — and in the king james, offense is not (so), that makes you mad. It's a stumbling block. So if anyone would cause a fellow believer to stumble: so paul says — and he teaches us, in first corinthians (the chapters as he gives them), and then romans (the chapters as he gives them, the second of them listed here) — he says: you know, if my eating meat would cause you to stumble — you look at me eating meat, saying: what a compromise. Or: what a sinner ('what are sinner', as heard), he's backsliding, he's denying jesus — he says: i won't eat meat, while the world stands. I'll never eat meat again, if it would actually cause you to stumble. So: if what we would do might cause another church member, or believer, to lose their faith in god: well, it's not worth it. So, for those reasons, probably, i would say: a majority — certainly a majority — of our believers today, would shave. But it's not based on scripture. It's based on: what is the cultural connotation, in your area? What does it mean? What does it signify? We don't want to signify any compromise, denial of holiness, denial of god's will, worldliness ('worliness', as heard). But we do want to signify: we're following the lord jesus christ. So we look again: the bible gives us christian liberty. But then the pastor knows the local church, and the local situation. He tries to give guidance, for that situation. And then the individual knows his own heart. And his own motives. And his own consecrations. And he needs to be faithful, to what god has called him to do.

Scriptures: 1 Corinthians 8; 1 Corinthians 10; Romans 15

Scripture index: Romans 14; Psalm 133; Isaiah (book-only); Genesis (book-only); 1 Corinthians 8; 1 Corinthians 10; Romans 15.