This also applies to holy water, incense, cushions, perfumes, oil etc. The symbols used by the Aaronic priesthood are now expressed on a higher plane in the Melchisedec priesthood; f or Perfume see 2 Corinthians 2: 15-16 and Ephesians 5: 2. Candles are used in some churches, because some believe they give a more natural light than an electric bulb. But the candles themselves are not holy candles and their use is not commanded. You may use them if you wish: it's a matter of choice - not law.
|1 Corinthians 11:||4: “Every man praying or prophesying having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.”|
In view of these facts we men in A Voice In The Wilderness - Canada do not cover our heads in church.
Hebrew tsaiph = she wrapped herself up - she concealed her face!
In Exodus 34:33 we read that Moses put a veil over his head. He literally hid his face from view. From this we can see that there is a big difference between the Biblical veil (still worn by women in the Middle and Far East) and the hats, bonnets, caps, turbans, plumes and fancy feathers posing as veils these days. In ancient days the veil was a sign of humility and modesty. The modern headgear we see in the churches these days is often a sign of pride. And so we draw a conclusion: that if women want to use a veil, let them do so. But make sure it is a true veil that covers the face and not just another excuse to parade a new piece of finery. A head scarf is perfectly in order nowadays.
At first reading, this text seems easy enough to understand. But in fact it encompasses far more than what appears on the surface. Basically it means, women should not wear clothes exclusively worn by men; and men should not wear clothes exclusively worn by women. As we all know, there are certain garments (socks, shirts, gloves, vests, pyjamas, hats, coats, cloaks etc.) which both sexes wear; but if a garment belongs exclusively to one sex, (i.e. a bra or frilly underwear) then a person of the other sex must not wear it. That is an abomination to the LORD.
In Scotland, as many people know, both men and women wear ‘kilts;’ which are knee-length pleated skirt-like garments of tartan wool. And in Pakistan both men and women wear long trouser-like pyjamas made of fine cotton or silk. No one in Scotland or Pakistan would suggest that these practices are violating the command mentioned above.
This issue about wearing clothes belonging to the opposite sex became a controversy probably at about the time when women began to wear ‘jeans.’ Jeans were first worn by working men in the USA. Being hard wearing and reasonably inexpensive they were best suited to the farms and cattle ranches of the wild west. Gradually they became fashionable as work clothes with men and women in virtually every trade and in every country. Jeans are now worn by both sexes all over the earth. Most women who now wear jeans are not posing as men any more than Muslim women who wear long pyjamas; or Scottish men who wear kilts are posing as women.
The question is: Is it a sin for a woman to wear jeans or trousers?
Personally we do not think so; simply because the command refers to a woman wearing men’s clothes with the express intention of posing as a man. Or a man wearing woman's clothes and posing as a woman. In other words, the command forbids ‘transvestism;’ which is ‘dressing in the clothes of the opposite sex with the express purpose of being mistaken for and treated like the opposite sex.’ Transvestites, though not necessarily wishing to change their sex, do this purely for personal pleasure! This is an abomination to the LORD!
I repeat, if a modern woman wears men's clothes because she wants to be mistaken for a man, she is breaking the command of God. She is behaving like a ‘transvestite;’ she is sinning. But if her clothes in no way detract from her femininity and no one is in any doubt whatsoever that she is a women and behaves like one, then we would hesitate to say that she is a ‘transvestite.’
Our personal opinion, however, is that a woman should not wear trousers or jeans unless engaged in gardening, building, mining, riding etc. Most woman think they look good in jeans; but most men, including ourselves, disagree. Women look best when they dress and behave like women. When they start imitating men, they usually lose out in the end. But that is another subject.
NOTE: The above excludes those rare medical cases where babies are born intersex; that is, with sex organs which are neither clearly male nor female. Sad to say, this physical abnormality is on the increase due to the pollution of our food and water supplies. But this transsexual, ‘medical problem’ must not be confused with transvestism, which like that other matter of Homosexuality, is an abomination unto the LORD.
Of course this doesn't expressly deal with the matter of makeup; but it does point to the heathen practice of printing marks on the body, cutting or tattooing marks in it; a practice which is now very fashionable. Some fans at sporting events now paint their faces and bodies in part or whole almost as a way of entertainment and nobody seems to connect this painting craze with the Bible command which forbids believers from marking their faces or bodies in any way.
We read in the book of Kings that the evil queen Jezebel painted her face and tired her hair in an attempt to impress the conquering Jehu who had just killed her son Joram king of Israel in battle.
|2 Kings 9:||22: “And it came to pass, when Joram saw Jehu, that he said, Is it peace, Jehu? And he answered, What peace, so long as the whoredoms of thy mother Jezebel and her witchcrafts are so many?…|
30: And when Jehu was come to Jezreel, Jezebel heard of it; and she painted her face, and tired her head, and looked out at a window.”
In view of these things my personal opinion is that true believers should not paint their faces in a vain attempt to look better than they really are. We can understand a very pale faced woman using a little colouring in order to look healthier; but that is a far cry from what one sees nowadays where, even in Christian churches, women paint their faces and nails and look more like modern versions of Jezebel than the children of God preparing to meet the Saviour. In short, scent, powder, a little makeup, hairstyles, jewellery, expensive clothes etc., may be in order; but there is a fine separating line in all of these things which Christian women and their husbands must decide for themselves.
|Malachi 3:||16: “Then they that feared the LORD spake often one to another: and the LORD hearkened, and heard it, and a book of remembrance was written before him for them that feared the LORD, and that thought upon his name.|
17: And they shall be mine, saith the LORD of hosts, in that day when I make up my jewels; and I will spare them, as a man spareth his own son that serveth him.”
If you study the following passages you will see clearly that the wearing of jewellery is not a sin. ( Exodus 11: 2, 12: 35, Isaiah 61: 10, Ezekiel 16: 17-19 ). Did not Yahweh Himself clothe Israel his wife with jewellery and fine clothes?
Nevertheless, the wearing of jewellery becomes sin when believers put their gems and fine clothes first before faith, holiness, humility and good works. Then the jewellery has become a snare, an idol - a sin. This means that women may wear jewellery if they please: it is not a sin, so long as it doesn't distort their appearance and become an over-riding obsession. Then, like every other excess, it can become a snare - a sin. In (1 Timothy 2: 9) Paul is warning about putting fine clothes, elaborate hairstyles and expensive jewellery before good deeds, submissiveness and godliness. It is all a question of priorities. As we said above, if a believer, male or female, gets these things out of order, (in other words if the most important things are put last) then he/she is missing the point and has made a idol of a perfectly acceptable thing. Bodily cleanliness, good clothes, well groomed hair etc. all have their proper place; but they should always come second to godliness, humility and good deeds.
|Revelation 7:14||14: “And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.”|
When the Bible speaks of certain saints wearing white some day in the future, it means we will be absolutely holy people - with no spot of sin in our characters. And that is what we should currently aim to be no matter what coloured garments we are wearing. Though white symbolizes a future moral state of absolute holiness and perfection, God does not command us to wear white robes every Sabbath day. Go to any synagogue and see if you can find anyone in white garments. The phrase: “washing one's robes and making them white in the blood of the Lamb” (Revelation 7: 9 & 13, Revelation 22: 14) is a symbolic way of saying the saints will keep Yahweh's commandments by the power and merits of the risen Saviour.
The Mechisedec priesthood in the ages to come will be absolutely holy and perfect people. Like their ancient counterparts in (2 Chronicles 5: 12) they will be dressed in white garments, which means they will be spiritually perfect and empowered to rule the nations.
When church leaders insist on their members wearing white garments, they are making up commandments of their own. Far better if they insisted on absolute holiness of character amongst themselves and their congregations.
The following stunning comments are taken from pages 197-199 of
Alexander Hyslop's book
THE TWO BABYLONS ISBN 0-7136 047 0 Published by S.W.Partridge & Co, 4,5,6 Soho Square, London, England.
“There is yet one more symbol of the Romish
worship to be noticed, and that is the sign of the cross.
In the Papal system, as is well known, the sign of the cross
and the image of the cross are all in all. No prayer can
be said, no worship engaged in, without the frequent use of the
sign of the cross. The cross is looked upon as the
grand charm, as the great refuge in every season of
danger, in every hour of temptation as the infallible preservative
from all the powers of darkness. The cross is adored with all the
homage due only to the Most High; and for anyone to call it,
in the hearing of a genuine Romanist, by the Scriptural term,
‘the accursed tree,’ is a mortal offence.
To say that such superstitious feelings for the sign of the cross,
such worship as Rome pays to a wooden or metal cross, ever grew
out of the saying of Paul,
That mystic Tau was marked in baptism on the foreheads of those initiated in the Mysteries, and was used in every variety of way as a most sacred symbol ... The mystic Tau, as a symbol of the great divinity, was called ‘the sign of life;’ it was used as an amulet over the heart; it was marked on the official garments of the priests, as on the official garments of the priests of Rome; it was born by kings in their hand, as a token of their dignity or divinely-conferred authority. The Vestal virgins of Pagan Rome wore it suspended from their necklaces, as the nuns do now. The Egyptians did the same, and many of the barbarous nations with whom they had intercourse, as the Egyptian monuments bear witness.
In reference to the adorning of some of these tribes, Wilkinson thus writes: ‘The girdle was sometimes highly ornamented; men as well as women wore earings; and they frequently had a small cross suspended to a necklace, or to the collar of their dress...’
There is hardly a Pagan tribe where the cross has not been found. The cross was worshipped by the Pagan Celts long before the incarnation and death of Christ.
“It is a fact” says Maurice, “no less remarkable than well attested, that the Druids in their groves were accustomed to select the most stately and beautiful tree as an emblem of the Deity they adored, and having cut the side branches, they affixed two of the largest of them to the highest part of the trunk, in such a manner that those branches extended on each side like the arms of a man, and, together with the body presented the appearance of a HUGE CROSS, and on the bark in several places, was inscribed the letter Thau.” It was worshipped in Mexico for ages before the Roman Catholic missionaries set foot there, large stone crosses being erected, probably to the ‘god of rain.’ The cross thus widely worshipped, or regarded as a sacred emblem, was the unequivocal symbol of Bacchus, the Babylonian Messiah, for he was represented with a head-band covered with crosses.” (end of quote - emphasis mine throughout)
In view of all these amazing facts, A Voice In The Wilderness - Canada advises all Christians to stop wearing or venerating the cross on which our Saviour was crucified. Who in their right mind would venerate a murder weapon used to kill a loved one? It is the same with the cross. We greatly rejoice that our Saviour died to bring about our salvation; but that ‘instrument of torture,’ which is what the cross was, is not something Christians should venerate.
What Does This Mean?
It means this: a woman's blood flow, and a man's spilled sperm, both initially render the person physically and ceremonially unclean. The life-blood in the woman's case, and the sperm in the man's were both provided to produce fruit in the womb. A wastage of either is not in Yahweh's plan. On the lower physical level the uncleanness can be washed away with soap and water. On the higher symbolic level the spillage of blood or sperm represents ‘uncleanness of the mind and spirit’ which only the Messiah's blood can cleanse. Now let us consider the higher symbolic meaning of wasted blood or sperm.
The Higher, Spiritual Plane
On the spiritual plane virtually everything outside Yahweh's will is polluted and unclean. Unbelief and disobedience have defiled everything. Unbelief is sin and sin pollutes everything it touches. Truth rejected by the unbelieving mind is wasted. And that wastage pollutes the unbeliever. It renders him/her unclean. That is the lesson of the menstruating woman and the sperm- stained man. Her womb and her husband's sperm were prepared for childbirth; but when she does not conceive, then the waiting blood supply in her body is no longer needed; it has been wasted and she becomes unclean. It is the same with the man. His sperm as intended to produce offspring. And when it is spilled on his garments or bed it is wasted. That wastage renders him and the woman with whom he is sleeping symbolically unclean and of course also physically unclean. Both the man and the woman may wash themselves with soap and water and become physically clean within minutes.
But what of the symbolic, or spiritual uncleanness?
This is uncleanness of a deadlier kind; which requires cleansing of a different kind. As stated above, a woman's menstruating womb and a man's wasted seed both symbolize a state of wastage brought about by unbelief. Unbelief is the worst form of wastage. It can only be cleansed or washed away by the blood of Yeshua the Messiah (Jesus Christ).
Scripture tells us that Yeshua’s Blood cleanses us from all sin; especially those high level sins like pride, unbelief, ingratitude, envy and hate. (Acts 22: 16, Revelation 1: 5, Revelation 7: 14) These are the sins that really pollute a person and render him/her unclean. (Matthew 15: 18) But a menstruating woman - though still unclean for sexual intercourse - could in the spiritual sense be perfectly clean: that is she could be clean in her mind and clean in her spirit. In other words a menstruating true believer is spiritually clean. Her hands may also be perfectly clean to keep house and serve food; and the chair she sits upon be perfectly clean for others to use. She's not a leper with a infectious physical disease.
Because of these facts we do not think that a menstruating woman should be separated from the rest of the church congregation, or that touching her or sitting on the chair she had recently sat upon, or eating the food she has prepared during her ‘period’ renders her, her husband or her family unclean. The same applies to a ‘sperm-stained man’ or a ‘doctor or undertaker who has touched a corpse;’ they may wash themselves clean and be fit to attend church. I repeat that we must differentiate between physical and symbolic uncleanness.