Cheryl

Don is correct in that the bottom line is the most important. Anything that comes before the bottom line cannot negate or contradict the conclusion. Whatever the logical reason that Paul had regarding the cutting of hair, it cannot contradict the fact that he gave women full freedom over their own heads. This means that a woman is free, and has full permission to cut her hair or not cut her hair. She also has freedom to shave her head or wear a head covering if she or her husband experiences shame by her unveiling.

We also can know for certainty that “nature” does not teach a law regarding the length of hair on a man or a woman. Both are equally given hair that grows unless you cut it. This equal natural expression of hair was given to both by God Himself. God is not shamed by a woman without hair (as the rule of the Nazarite vow shows) and God is not shamed by a man with long hair (as the rule of the Nazarite vows shows). Paul was not forcing a veil on a woman so Paul was not upholding a man-made law.

By the way, Merry Christmas everyone!