The UPC is going to more emphasis on holiness !!!

[ShofarMan]

This month's Pentecostal Herald is dedicated to the topic, articles include:


A Holy Heart by Nancy Grandquist
A study in Holiness by Stanley Russell
Biblical Standards or Personal Preferences by Ron Mullins
Holy Men and Women by John Hanson
Humor Does not Justify Quenching the Spirit by Tim O'Daniel
Princess or Prostitute by Natalie Huckaby
The Sermon of His Life by Jason Cox
Don't Let the Media Press you into its Mold by W.C. Parkey
The Mixed Multitude by Darrell Johns
Whats for Dinner by Ruth Harvey

[SDG]

This month's Pentecostal Herald is dedicated to the topic, articles include:


A Holy Heart by Nancy Grandquist
A study in Holiness by Stanley Russell
Biblical Standards or Personal Preferences by Ron Mullins
Holy Men and Women by John Hanson
Humor Does not Justify Quenching the Spirit by Tim O'Daniel
Princess or Prostitute by Natalie Huckaby
The Sermon of His Life by Jason Cox
Don't Let the Media Press you into its Mold by W.C. Parkey
The Mixed Multitude by Darrell Johns
Whats for Dinner by Ruth Harvey

Oy vey.

What's for Dinner, Ruth? Holy Macaroni?

[SDG]

Princess or Prostitute??? How manipulative.

Let me guess ... Jezebel makes an appearance in said article?

[rgcraig]

Sounds likes some interesting reading.

I know Darrell John's would be good!

[Cindy]

I am going to see if it's online. Sounds interesting.

[Cindy]

Paid subscriptions are available. I think I will check it out.

[Brother Price]

If holiness was truly understood, we would not need to have people teach us what holiness dress is. What is needed more in churches today is a submission to conviction, a discerning of the Spirit concerning what is modest and what is not.

[Cindy]

Princess or Prostitute??? How manipulative.

Let me guess ... Jezebel makes an appearance in said article?

:blah :blah :blah :blah

[StMark]

Oy vey.

What's for Dinner, Ruth? Holy hairballs?


That was pretty cruel Dan

[Cindy]

Oy vey.

What's for Dinner, Ruth? Holy hairballs?

Some people do have that problem Daniel, especially girls, that either, lick, chew on, or actually eat they're hair.

[Nahum]

Actually (before Little Napoleon gets started on his rant), the articles were very balanced and good. Concepts were addressed, as opposed to specific issues.

[SDG]

Actually (before Little Napoleon gets started on his rant), the articles were very balanced and good. Concepts were addressed, as opposed to specific issues.

Get me a copy, PP. Hook a brother up.

[CC1]

This month's Pentecostal Herald is dedicated to the topic, articles include:


A Holy Heart by Nancy Grandquist
A study in Holiness by Stanley Russell
Biblical Standards or Personal Preferences by Ron Mullins
Holy Men and Women by John Hanson
Humor Does not Justify Quenching the Spirit by Tim O'Daniel
Princess or Prostitute by Natalie Huckaby
The Sermon of His Life by Jason Cox
Don't Let the Media Press you into its Mold by W.C. Parkey
The Mixed Multitude by Darrell Johns
Whats for Dinner by Ruth Harvey

Haller-luyah!!!!!!!!

Straighten them heatherns out!!!!

I hope they covered the essentials like the evil of the color red and open toed shoes.:happydance

[StMark]

Haller-luyah!!!!!!!!

Straighten them heatherns out!!!!

I hope they covered the essentials like the evil of the color red and open toed shoes.:happydance



NOw you see????

Renda this is why this forum gets the reputation of mocking the UPC and Pentecost in general

[Nahum]

Get me a copy, PP. Hook a brother up.

I think I already threw mine away.

[El Predicador]

Princess or Prostitute??? How manipulative.

Let me guess ... Jezebel makes an appearance in said article?

Would you even recognize a Jezebel in your church?

[RandyWayne]

Princess or Prostitute by Natalie Huckaby

Yes, I find the title of this one disturbing and have a very good idea where it is heading....

Humor Does not Justify Quenching the Spirit by Tim O'Daniel


I am genuinly curious about this one though. ALL good humor is based on pain (slapstick) or embarrassment, or someone/somethings misfortune in general. Just look at ANY (good) sitcom, especially the older ones, and you see this to be the case.
The really bad humor comes when none of the above is called upon. This is when you end up with the real "groaners" -usually in the form of bad puns told by elders over the pulpit.

[El Predicador]

Would you even recognize a Jezebel in your church?

bump

[LadyRev]

If it weren't for the women...

[RandyWayne]

Would you even recognize a Jezebel in your church?

Depending on how you define "Jezebel", probably not. If you define a "Jezebel" as a harlot who seduces and conquers, there may be several and no one would know other then the men she slept with. If on the other hand she is defined as many in church do, as someone with makeup, then I would think it would be rather easy for obvious reasons.

[Encryptus]

If it weren't for the women...

..... many men would have nothing to preach about?

[Steve Epley]

Would you even recognize a Jezebel in your church?

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOPS!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! Would she stand out or blend in.:happydance:happydance

[Cindy]

Depending on how you define "Jezebel", probably not. If you define a "Jezebel" as a harlot who seduces and conquers, there may be several and no one would know other then the men she slept with. If on the other hand she is defined as many in church do, as someone with makeup, then I would think it would be rather easy for obvious reasons.

And therein lies the problem RW, a few on here assume that very thing any time holiness is brought up, that it is about outward holiness or Pentecostal outward standards. Sad and pitiful. Whereas a few are more than ready to accept mockery of people's belief's and call it humor. It's not funny from either side. But I forgot if it's painful it's humorous according to you.

[Jack Shephard]

If holiness was truly understood, we would not need to have people teach us what holiness dress is. What is needed more in churches today is a submission to conviction, a discerning of the Spirit concerning what is modest and what is not.

Agreed, but always remember Bro Bill that there are people out there that have higher convictions and no one can be saved in their churches. I got family in a ULTRA CON church. If I mentioned the pastor there would be people on here that know the man, not UPC anymore. They do not allow anything, but bad attitudes it seems. I heard the aunt relay a store about a women showing up at church wearing jewelry. The aunt said something to the affect of it is not ok to wear that hear and made her leave. My wifes grandfather went started to go back to that church and the pastor told him if he wanted to come to that church he had to shave or he better not return. That is hard core.

[Sweet Pea]

My suggestion to some of you would be......

Read it BEFORE you make judgmental statements regarding what the author was presenting! :girlytantrum:girlytantrum

I recently saw this Herald.... I didn't thoroughly read every article, but I skimmed enough to get the basis....

I think some of you are jumping to conclusions!

[StillStanding]

I think I already threw mine away.
:toofunny

[James Griffin]

My suggestion to some of you would be......

Read it BEFORE you make judgmental statements regarding what the author was presenting! :girlytantrum:girlytantrum

I recently saw this Herald.... I didn't thoroughly read every article, but I skimmed enough to get the basis....

I think some of you are jumping to conclusions!

Agreed. Wish some of the articles were accessible online

[Nahum]

Again, I read the articles and found them quite balanced.

[Sam]

I posted one of the articles on AFF.
The one I posted was by a person who is a librarian and English teacher. He quoted some old writings that spoke of baptismal regeneration and forgiveness through water baptism. Usually Oneness folks put these writings down because of their "Roman Catholic" leaning.

[Jack Shephard]

I think the church needs more Holiness, but what we do not need is more rules and regulations. If Holiness makes you seperate by your dress then do it, but be very aware that what God might ask you to do does not mean God will ask me and vicaversa. Holiness unto the Lord is the greatest seperation point we have from the world. Our Holiness(inward stuff) is what the seperation point should be, but in this movement Holiness(outward stuff) has made us seperate from each other. In the words of Larry the Cable Guy, "that there ain't right."

[StMark]

We know that Jezebel was a woman that painted up and was rebellious against God, not a man. So, she represents the female spirit of rebellion. now, that is not to say that men can be equally as evil just in a different way. The man doesn't paint up to seduce the prophet and she is under the Man yet tried to ursurp and manipulate herself.
Akon was a man and just as evil but in a different setting.

[Encryptus]

We know that Jezebel was a woman that painted up and was rebellious against God, not a man. So, she represents the female spirit of rebellion. now, that is not to say that men can be equally as evil just in a different way. The man doesn't paint up to seduce the prophet and she is under the Man yet tried to ursurp and manipulate herself.
Akon was a man and just as evil but in a different setting.

The man doesn't paint up to seduce the prophet - nowadays that could happen.

she is under the Man yet tried to ursurp and manipulate herself. - some interesting mental images come to mind, but what did you mean?

[StMark]

The man doesn't paint up to seduce the prophet - nowadays that could happen.

she is under the Man yet tried to ursurp and manipulate herself. - some interesting mental images come to mind, but what did you mean?


you know

[Encryptus]

you know

actually, seriously, no what did you mean?

[StMark]

actually, seriously, no what did you mean?


Encrytus come on

I'm not going to say at the risk of getting my head on the chopping block

[Mrs. LPW]

Our Pastor recently taught on a Sunday morning and the one quote I'll never forget is this:

Rules without Relationship will lead to Rebellion.

If you're only staying with your spouse and not taking off on her for the hottie at work who is slithering up to you or crying on your shoulder or letting you cry on thiers...because you know you have to, you've got a problem. Rules won't fix it.

Thank you to the people who have stated that we should reserve judgement on things that we haven't seen with our own eyes or heard with our own ears. You are the voice of wisdom, reason and godliness.

Proverbs 18:13

[Encryptus]

.......she is under the Man yet tried to ursurp and manipulate herself.




[I]she is under the Man yet tried to ursurp and manipulate herself. - some interesting mental images come to mind, but what did you mean?

Encryptus come on

I'm not going to say at the risk of getting my head on the chopping block

You said it already. So what do you mean she is "Under the Man" yet tries to ursurp "and manipulate herself"????

[Hoovie]

I got it last week and saw nothing that caused great alarm. Seemed to place "holiness" in proper context without undue emphasis on outward standards.

[StMark]

You said it already. So what do you mean she is "Under the Man" yet tries to ursurp "and manipulate herself"????


nevermind

[HeavenlyOne]

I'd really like to know also, Mark.

[Jack Shephard]

We know that Jezebel was a woman that painted up and was rebellious against God, not a man. So, she represents the female spirit of rebellion. now, that is not to say that men can be equally as evil just in a different way. The man doesn't paint up to seduce the prophet and she is under the Man yet tried to ursurp and manipulate herself.
Akon was a man and just as evil but in a different setting.

The whole point about the Jezabel thing that is ALWAYS missed is the rebelion part. Ministers in this movement preach about the look and that being the issue. That was not the intent of the issue, IMO. The issue was not what she looked like. It was more about what she was did. The seduction was not limited to her look. I feel that the look had little to do with the enticement and the rebelion. It was the attitude.

[James Griffin]

If it weren't for the women...

..... many men would have nothing to preach about?

Ok, that was funny.

[James Griffin]

The whole point about the Jezabel thing that is ALWAYS missed is the rebelion part. Ministers in this movement preach about the look and that being the issue. That was not the intent of the issue, IMO. The issue was not what she looked like. It was more about what she was did. The seduction was not limited to her look. I feel that the look had little to do with the enticement and the rebelion. It was the attitude.

Would not say it is ALWAYS missed but yes it was rebellion wrapped in seduction.

Would still be interesting to know what the article said....

Furthermore IF I recall correctly the title was Princess or Prostitute and someone ASSUMED Jezebel would show up.

[Jack Shephard]

Would not say it is ALWAYS missed but yes it was rebellion wrapped in seduction.

Would still be interesting to know what the article said....

Furthermore IF I recall correctly the title was Princess or Prostitute and someone ASSUMED Jezebel would show up.

Correct. I have the mag just need to read the article, but I am just stating to the point of the whole Jezabel subject as a whole whether the article is about her or not.

[RandyWayne]

The whole point about the Jezabel thing that is ALWAYS missed is the rebelion part. Ministers in this movement preach about the look and that being the issue. That was not the intent of the issue, IMO. The issue was not what she looked like. It was more about what she was did. The seduction was not limited to her look. I feel that the look had little to do with the enticement and the rebelion. It was the attitude.

It always struck me that the bible speaks of her "painting" her face in the same matter-of-fact way It says she "looked out a window". And yet in conservative circles the make-up part almost always trumps the whole rebellion/seduction part.
Logic based on human nature would say that there MUST be a church somewhere that has a rule against women looking out windows......

[pelathais]

NOw you see????

Renda this is why this forum gets the reputation of mocking the UPC and Pentecost in general
I would never wear the red open toed shoes myself. Just the thought of that is wrong. :blah

StMark, given our culture I think that anything except Paul Harvey and Louis Lamore would be considered "outside the pale" when it comes to the written word or commentary. The fact that we're even speaking up is revolutionary to our culture. In the past you had to be in the ministry in order to send your brother to hell.

The Internet has brought democracy to damnation, and for some this freedom is exhilarating.

(I'm not saying that's always a good thing, I'm just saying it's a thing).

[pelathais]

It always struck me that the bible speaks of her "painting" her face in the same matter-of-fact way It says she "looked out a window". And yet in conservative circles the make-up part almost always trumps the whole rebellion/seduction part.
Logic based on human nature would say that there MUST be a church somewhere that has a rule against women looking out windows......
In antiquity, a woman looking out a window was often the sign of a prostitute. I guess Amsterdam is the modern equivalent.

Judges 5:28 is sometimes seen as a double entendre of insult toward the family of Sisera. On the one hand his mother is looking for Sisera's return which will never come, and on the other hand she's getting into a position where she will have to provide her own livelihood from now on working in the "oldest profession."

Another symbol may have had to do with the Canaanite and Mesopotamian fertility goddesses. They were often depicted "in the window" usually with lattices. The religion of the Canaanites was dead or dying, and their gods are portrayed as pathetically looking for something that is already dead.

http://www.womeninthebible.net/1.3-7_nimrud_woman_at_window.jpg

[Pressing-On]

This month's Pentecostal Herald is dedicated to the topic, articles include:


A Holy Heart by Nancy Grandquist
A study in Holiness by Stanley Russell
Biblical Standards or Personal Preferences by Ron Mullins
Holy Men and Women by John Hanson
Humor Does not Justify Quenching the Spirit by Tim O'Daniel
Princess or Prostitute by Natalie Huckaby
The Sermon of His Life by Jason Cox
Don't Let the Media Press you into its Mold by W.C. Parkey
The Mixed Multitude by Darrell Johns
Whats for Dinner by Ruth Harvey

I don't have mine yet. I rarely read it, but I'll let you know about this one. :D

[OneAccord]

Would you even recognize a Jezebel in your church?

Yeah, I probably would. She'd be the one sittin' with her husband, Ahab.



(Sorry, the Jezebel in the Bible is the only woman I have ever known by that name!)

[jaxfam6]

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOPS!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! Would she stand out or blend in.:happydance:happydance

In Daniels defense, having seen pictures of his love and some from his myspace I would say that a Jezebel would STAND OUT in their church.
Now I have seen some others that I am not sure that is the case but with their church I believe she would.
But as stated before it would depend on someones definition of a Jezebel.

[jaxfam6]

I would never wear the red open toed shoes myself. Just the thought of that is wrong. :blah



What's wrong with red open toed shoes? I happen to have both and I like them very much.

[James Griffin]

In Daniels defense, having seen pictures of his love and some from his myspace I would say that a Jezebel would STAND OUT in their church.
Now I have seen some others that I am not sure that is the case but with their church I believe she would.
But as stated before it would depend on someones definition of a Jezebel.

But Dan's love attends a UPC church in California.

Dan's church is in Houston.

Not that I am saying he does have any at church, but just wanted to clarify.

[pelathais]

What's wrong with red open toed shoes? I happen to have both and I like them very much.
Let's just say that there are some things that some people ought not to wear even if other people can.

For me, I'm doing you a favor (and myself) by not wearing the red open toed shoes. In fact, the only red shoe I could ever picture myself wearing would be red high top Converse sneakers - and even then, only if I had run off and joined the Ringling Brothers' Circus.

[bkstokes]

But Dan's love attends a UPC church in California.

Dan's church is in Houston.

Not that I am saying he does have any at church, but just wanted to clarify.

Oh

I always thought that Dan was married to the lady in the picture.

[bkstokes]

But Dan's love attends a UPC church in California.

Dan's church is in Houston.

Not that I am saying he does have any at church, but just wanted to clarify.

Congrats James for the 1,000 mark -- from what I have seen you have done it without sacrificing a good spirit.

[pelathais]

Yeah, I probably would. She'd be the one sittin' with her husband, Ahab.



(Sorry, the Jezebel in the Bible is the only woman I have ever known by that name!)
Revelation 2:20 appears to refer to another "Jezebel."

[jaxfam6]

But Dan's love attends a UPC church in California.

Dan's church is in Houston.

Not that I am saying he does have any at church, but just wanted to clarify.

You stir the stink as much as Dan does don't you

thanks for the clarification

[jaxfam6]

Let's just say that there are some things that some people ought not to wear even if other people can.

For me, I'm doing you a favor (and myself) by not wearing the red open toed shoes. In fact, the only red shoe I could ever picture myself wearing would be red high top Converse sneakers - and even then, only if I had run off and joined the Ringling Brothers' Circus.

lol

I have a pair of red hiking boots that are very comfortable and then I have my sandals but as for red open toed shoes I would no look good in them either big ole ugly hairy toes they would think I was an ogress (is that spelled right?)
anyway
I do understand.

[James Griffin]

Oh

I always thought that Dan was married to the lady in the picture.

They actually met over the Synadelfos.com forum some months ago. About the third serious couple so far, I believe. J-Roc may be changing its emphasis, he just started a thread taking applications LOL

Anyway Dan and Cassie instantly connected, appear to be good for each other. I missed meeting her on her visit to Houston literally by minutes.

[jaxfam6]

But Dan's love attends a UPC church in California.

Dan's church is in Houston.

Not that I am saying he does have any at church, but just wanted to clarify.

So are we correct in saying then that UPC churches in California are as liberal and CHARISMATIC as Dan's church in Texas???

:happydance

[SDG]

Would you even recognize a Jezebel in your church?

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOPS!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! Would she stand out or blend in.:happydance:happydance

What made Jezebel stand out or blend in my preacher friends?

Fixing herself up like most of the women in this region did during the historical time period ... as they do today

....or what is it her evil attitude?

You and I both know it was the latter.

Was it her brushing her hair and her painting herself that brought judgment to her and her house?

The term Jezebel, equated w/ being a temptress, in our Western culture has the same stigma the Doubting Thomas has. Both labels however are misnomers and do not fairly characterize these personages.

I submit that there women and men in America's churches that have the Spirit of Jezebel and has little to do w/ their use of cosmetics ... nor are these the tell-tale signs of their evil attitudes.

There are plenty of Oneness women, and Baptist women, (and men for that matter) ....

sitting in the pews Holiness churches that preach against makeup that have this Jezebel spirit ... and it has nothing to do w/ cosmetics ...

nor the skin matching blush, foundation the women are wearing or the light eyeliner or lipstick they carefully and secretly put on as to make it look natural.

Just as there are some who go to liberal churches who have it caked on like Tammy Fayes ... who have this spirit.

The true marker that distinguishes whether a Jezebel either stands out or blends in your very church would be if they practiced the rebellious, idolatrous and immoral sins she engaged in.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Let's go to the bible archives ... shall we???
... rather than our manuals:

Jezebel was a deceitful woman and idolatrous who uses her husband and later her sons to gain and retain power over Israel. In addition to instituting the worship of her pagan god in Israel and causing temples to be built in his honor, Jezebel is responsible for the execution of many prophets of Jehovah, the God of the Jewish people she rules. After Jezebel engineers the death of a man named Naboth and his sons by wrongly accusing them of treason (http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-treason.htm), so that Ahab may take possession of their vineyard (http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-vineyard.htm), the prophet (http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-prophet.htm) Elijah prophesies Jezebel's violent death.


Jezebel survives both Ahab and her elder son, Ahaziah, as queen. Her younger son, Joram, succeeds to the throne, but is killed by Jehu, who thereafter becomes king of Israel. During the revolt led by Jehu, Jezebel is also killed, fulfilling Elijah's prophecy (http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-prophecy.htm). She is pushed out of her window and her corpse is eaten by dogs.


http://www.wisegeek.com/who-is-jezebel.htm

---------------------------------------------------------------

Jezebel is usually associated with clothes, makeup, seduction ... that's a superficial skin deep approach to a deeper and more serious issue.

The deeper truth is her spiritual deception. Both men and women that want control over a church, congregation can operate with a Jezebel spirit. The spirit of Jezebel is genderless ... my preacher friends.

A Jezebel spirit is one who inappropriately through hostile measures takes possession of God-ordained positions of authority. He/She is manipulative, conniving & uses intimidation (threats, speaks spells ) to dominate and control people.

The spirit of Jezebel is a lustful spirit, she lusts after the worship of self and the gods of this world. She hates the prophetic voice of God and will try and silence God's prophets.

And this spirit can come in the form of some the holiest looking people we know. Even an 80 year old saint of a woman dressed in Holiness garb.

The flawed thinking your paradigm shows that if that 80 year old woman puts on lipstick, ... she must want to seduce someone and therefore is a Jezebel ... GIVE US BREAK!!!!!

It's a faulty cause and effect relationship that does not examine the root.

One writer states:

Sin by association is not necessarily sin at all.

Let's suppose it was written about Jezebel: "And when Jehu was come to
Jezreel, Jezebel heard of it; and she put on her wonder bra, red
panty hose and shiny black patented leather high heeled shoes,
together with her silk yellow dress. And combing her hair loose
so it hung to her waste, she looked out at a window." Would this make wonder bras sin per se? Would silk yellow dresses become a sin to wear?

How about black patented shoes or having a brushed head of
hair loose to the waist, would they be sin also?

What if it had been written that Jezebel perfumed herself
and put on a pearl necklace, would that nullify the verses where
such are used in a good sense, and so become sin for all women to use perfume or a necklace?

Back to Woodrow:

" .......Camphire, mentioned in the Song of Solomon(1:14;
4:13) and identified as henna (Strong's Concordance, #3724),
provided a much used reddish-orange dye. Concerning this, the
Encyclopedia Judaica (Vol.8, p. 327) says: 'Throughout the ages the peoples of the East prized this beautiful, fast dye which was used for dying the hair and nails.'

Henna was also used on the palms of the hands and soles of
the feet.

Considering how well-known and how widely used these various forms of make-up were in the land of the Bible, if God was against its use, why is it nowhere stated in the Bible?
How true is the statement:

'Man looketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart' (1 Samuel 16:7)!http://www.keithhunt.com/Makeup3.html


Lastly the Jezebel of the bible ... including the one, an alluring prophetess, that John writes of in Revelation is not directly associated w/ sexual promiscuity per se ... although, of course, sexual perversion was always part of pagan worship ...

Her seduction was a spiritual one ... one that sought to seduce the king of Israel and the people of God away from the Holy One of Israel.

so to answer your question ... can I recognize one in my church ... I'd hope so before she or he brings irreparable damage to the congregation ... but it wouldn't be because of his or her cosmetics but it would be THE ATTITUDE.

[SDG]

Edited by Admin
Admin.... Ban me if you like....Its how I feel!

Notice NO Smiley .

This is what you call Holiness, Dan?

[jaxfam6]

This is what you call Holiness, Dan?

Bet you didn't even notice that someone defended you. You immediately jumped on the stuff that can stir more stink.

Now my feelings are hurt and I may never come to your defense again.

:tissue:tissue:tissue:tissue

[SDG]

I think the premise that if a woman is wearing some form of makeup she is a prostitute and not a child of God washed by the blood of the Lamb is offensive and tramples on the children of the Most High and His sacrifice.

It also condemns a great majority of women ... in the organization including preachers wives whose purses are filled w/ Estee Lauder, Looreal, Avon and Mary Kay cosmetics in their purses.

[Brother Price]

Edited by Admin
Notice NO Smiley.

Thank God for deliverance from this hateful spirit that makes one think they are better than everyone else. This is a case of demonic spirit showing itself. And yes, I believe legalism is a demonic spirit.

Notice I did not state standards, but legalism, before anyone jumps my gun.

NLYP, you need to seriously find an altar, pray through, repent, and find Christ. from this post, you seriously need some deliverance.

You would keep standards, but you deny Christ in your attitude. So, for this brief moment, let the old BP come back and say this.

You need to repent, lest from the Lake Of Fire you find your portion.

OK, nuff said.

[Pressing-On]

I think the premise that if a woman is wearing some form of makeup she is a prostitute and not a child of God washed by the blood of the Lamb is offensive and tramples on the children of the Most High.

It also condemns a great majority of women ... in the organization including preachers wives whose purses are filled w/ Estee Lauder, Looreal, Avon and Mary Kay cosmetics in their purses.

Daniel,
I would have prefered that you would have read the article, firsthand, and then critiqued it from there. That's a more intelligent way to do it and the more responsible.

I voted "YES" remember! :happydance :toofunny

[Brother Price]

I am sorry, but the spirit of Jezebel can be in women in the liberal movement, as well as those in the conservative movement. Any woman who seeks dominance and control of every individual, and leads a soul from God to some idol is a Jezebel. I have known several, and even ran into one recently at a funeral.

[SDG]

Daniel,
I would have prefered that you would have read the article, firsthand, and then critiqued it from there. That's a more intelligent way to do it and the more responsible.

I voted "YES" remember! :happydance :toofunny

Who says I was critiquing an article ... you and I have been around Pentecost long enough to know that often ... even if that's not what this article is about ... that cosmetics are equated automatically w/ prostitution and Jezebel.

As evident in the two posts posed by Holiness preachers as to whether or not I could distinguish a Jezebel in my church.

So it is not a stretch to continue this discussion intelligently based on the doctrines espoused by many Holiness preachers and how they manipulate the word "prostitute" and "Jezebel".

[SDG]

Bet you didn't even notice that someone defended you. You immediately jumped on the stuff that can stir more stink.

Now my feelings are hurt and I may never come to your defense again.

:tissue:tissue:tissue:tissue

Thank you Jax for your kind words.

[jaxfam6]

Thank you Jax for your kind words.

Boy you saved yourself there. I was ready to really have a sob party and get a petition together and have you banished to outer darkness, you know we righteous folk have that power.

[Pressing-On]

Who says I was critiquing an article ... you and I have been around Pentecost long enough to know that often ... even if that's not what this article is about ... that cosmetics are equated automatically w/ prostitution and Jezebel.

As evident in the two posts posed by Holiness preachers as to whether or not I could distinguish a Jezebel in my church.

So it is not a stretch to continue this discussion intelligently based on the doctrines espoused by many Holiness preachers and how they manipulate the word "prostitute".
Yes, BUT the thread started out with a Table of Contents and I think, because of the tone of this forum, for the most part, it would have been more accurate and interesting to pick the magazine apart paragraph by paragraph, sentence by sentence, word by word.

Then we would have really gotten somewhere - like a deer hunter - waiting, plotting and in for the kill. :D

I personally like to go for the blood when I'm in a fight. Directly for the Jugular Vein, KWIM?

:bliss:bliss

[jaxfam6]

Thank you Jax for your kind words.

btw

my wife says you have a very pretty girl friend. Thought I would pass that along, not that our opinions matter or anything.

[Michael Phelps]

Boy you saved yourself there. I was ready to really have a sob party and get a petition together and have you banished to outer darkness, you know we righteous folk have that power.

You would have to take a number.

But, not much higher than 3.

[Brother Price]

Boy you saved yourself there. I was ready to really have a sob party and get a petition together and have you banished to outer darkness, you know we righteous folk have that power.
Ooooohhhhhhhhh... I could take it and run with it, but I have been bad enough with the loss of my temper tonight. :D

[SDG]

btw

my wife says you have a very pretty girl friend. Thought I would pass that along, not that our opinions matter or anything.

Please thank her for me ... your opinions are my opinion ... I'm one blessed dude.

[SDG]

Yes, BUT the thread started out with a Table of Contents and I think, because of the tone of this forum, for the most part, it would have been more accurate and interesting to pick the magazine apart paragraph by paragraph, sentence by sentence, word by word.

Then we would have really gotten somewhere - like a deer hunter - waiting, plotting and in for the kill. :D

I personally like to go for the blood when I'm in a fight. Directly for the Jugular Vein, KWIM?

:bliss:bliss

It would be nice ... but of course there are copyright issues.
Good readers use our background knowledge as a pre-reading strategy ... so I have done just this ... even if my prediction is less than accurate it is based on a wealth of knowledge in this area we all share base on our common heritage.

[Pressing-On]

It would be nice ... but of course there are copyright issues.
Good readers use our background knowledge as a pre-reading strategy ... so I have done just this ... even if my prediction is less than accurate it is based on a wealth of knowledge in this area we all share base on our common heritage.
Well, you could get everyone to get a copy and you could start a thread about it and say, "This is what I think about paragraph one and especially the second sentence. Don't ya'll think that is stupid and off base?"

:toofunny:toofunny

Gotta run. I've spent wayyyyy too much time on here today!

[SDG]

Well, you could get everyone to get a copy and you could start a thread about it and say, "This is what I think about paragraph one and especially the second sentence. Don't ya'll think that is stupid and off base?"

:toofunny:toofunny

Gotta run. I've spent wayyyyy too much time on here today!

Sounds like a grand plan.

[CC1]

Is the Herald online in PDF form? I wonder if they would let us post those holiness aritcles and then have a discussion about each.

[Newman]

Is the Herald online in PDF form? I wonder if they would let us post those holiness aritcles and then have a discussion about each.

Hahaha!! Yeah right! :toofunny

[rgcraig]

Is the Herald online in PDF form? I wonder if they would let us post those holiness aritcles and then have a discussion about each.

For a fee you can have them delievered to your home, but no online Herald.

[Newman]

Again, I read the articles and found them quite balanced.

Balanced? Was an article published by the Herald with the point of view that women aren't mandated by Scripture to wear long hair and dresses but to maintain their feminity while attired modestly for their culture?

Or by balanced do you mean that some of the articles were about outward standards and some about the heart? :cool:

[CC1]

Did Ruth Reider-Harvey's artiicle deal with what to do when your extra special uncut hair Angel falls down on the job? I think she has experience with this that I have not seen dealt with in her books.

[SDG]

Did Ruth Reider-Harvey's artiicle deal with what to do when your extra special uncut hair Angel falls down on the job? I think she has experience with this that I have not seen dealt with in her books.

I said much less ....

*Dan shakes his head*

[CC1]

Balanced? Was an article published by the Herald with the point of view that women aren't mandated by Scripture to wear long hair and dresses but to maintain their feminity while attired modestly for their culture?

Or by balanced do you mean that some of the articles were about outward standards and some about the heart? :cool:

I couldnt' believe it when I didn't see your name on that list of UPC authors contributing to the "Holding The Fort" issue of the Herald!

How did they overlook getting you to contribute?

This edition of the Herald dovetails in perfectly with my theory espoused before the TV resolution ever passed that if it did the UPC would take a hard right at least for awhile as everybody from Kenneth Haney & Anthony Mangun on down would be trying to prove their "street cred" when it comes to "holiness".

I am also certain this is an attempt to pacify those conservative UPC preachers who were behind the idea of the WWPF until it became an either or situation with the UPC and now they are wavering on what to do.

[CC1]

I said much less ....

*Dan shakes his head*


You never say less.

My post is not specific at all.

[Cindy]

I got it last week and saw nothing that caused great alarm. Seemed to place "holiness" in proper context without undue emphasis on outward standards.

Oh my, that can't be good. How will we know if women can wear pants, make-up, jewelry, or cut they're hair? Or (gasp) watch TV?

Oh wait, we can go on a forum and mock and make deragatory remarks about our brother's and sister's. That is much more holy.

Whew a few of y'all are safe.

[Cindy]

Agreed, but always remember Bro Bill that there are people out there that have higher convictions and no one can be saved in their churches. I got family in a ULTRA CON church. If I mentioned the pastor there would be people on here that know the man, not UPC anymore. They do not allow anything, but bad attitudes it seems. I heard the aunt relay a store about a women showing up at church wearing jewelry. The aunt said something to the affect of it is not ok to wear that hear and made her leave. My wifes grandfather went started to go back to that church and the pastor told him if he wanted to come to that church he had to shave or he better not return. That is hard core.

That is so sad JT.

[Cindy]

Would not say it is ALWAYS missed but yes it was rebellion wrapped in seduction.

Would still be interesting to know what the article said....

Furthermore IF I recall correctly the title was Princess or Prostitute and someone ASSUMED Jezebel would show up.

And we know what assuming does.

[Sweet Pea]

You never say less.

My post is not specific at all.


WHAT??????????? Anyone who know her background knows exactly what you were referring to. I thought your post was distasteful and disrespectful!

JMHO!

[Cindy]

Congrats James for the 1,000 mark -- from what I have seen you have done it without sacrificing a good spirit.

Amen!!!!!!!

[Scott Hutchinson]

As Christians we certainly do need Holiness in our lives.So increasing our prayer time and bible reading should help us in that department.

[Mrs. LPW]

Dan and Sweet Pea are right CC1, that was below the belt.

[Raven]

This edition of the Herald dovetails in perfectly with my theory espoused before the TV resolution ever passed that if it did the UPC would take a hard right at least for awhile as everybody from Kenneth Haney & Anthony Mangun on down would be trying to prove their "street cred" when it comes to "holiness".

I am also certain this is an attempt to pacify those conservative UPC preachers who were behind the idea of the WWPF until it became an either or situation with the UPC and now they are wavering on what to do.
CC1
I have to agree with you here my friend. I saw it coming ever since Tampa. Newton's "Third Law" works with organizations as well as with dynamics. For every action there's an equal reaction.
Raven

[CC1]

WHAT??????????? Anyone who know her background knows exactly what you were referring to. I thought your post was distasteful and disrespectful!

JMHO!


That was the whole point of my post. To make my point without being specific about a distasteful personal matter.

It is very relevent because of the notion she puts forth in her books that a woman's uncut hair will protect her from those type things happening in her family when that is a bunch of hooey and her own life reveals that.

We are all subject to human failure.

[Mrs. LPW]

That was the whole point of my post. To make my point without being specific about a distasteful personal matter.

It is very relevent because of the notion she puts forth in her books that a woman's uncut hair will protect her from those type things happening in her family when that is a bunch of hooey and her own life reveals that.

We are all subject to human failure.

Have you read her book?

Whether you agree with her or disagree, taking any kind of pleasure in any shape or form, in someone's personal heartache is completley the opposite of God's love.

Your words are disturbing.

[CC1]

Have you read her book?

Whether you agree with her or disagree, taking any kind of pleasure in any shape or form, in someone's personal heartache is completley the opposite of God's love.

Your words are disturbing.

There is no pleasure taken. Only disgust at the heresey she is promoting within the UPC with the approval of many major pastors and officials.

Sometimes things happen for a reason and I am inclined to think that is the case here. I hope eventually some good comes from all of it.

[Mrs. LPW]

There is no pleasure taken. Only disgust at the heresey she is promoting within the UPC with the approval of many major pastors and officials.

Sometimes things happen for a reason and I am inclined to think that is the case here. I hope eventually some good comes from all of it.

Have you read her book CC1?

[Scott Hutchinson]

I certainly don't agree with alot of things Sister Harvey teaches,I hope I got her last name since it's not Reider anymore,but I certainly wouldn't get any pleasure by pointing out a misfortune in her life.
I've been through some things myself that I wouldn't want to be brought to the public's
attention.

[Raven]

Have you read her book?

Whether you agree with her or disagree, taking any kind of pleasure in any shape or form, in someone's personal heartache is completley the opposite of God's love.

Your words are disturbing.
MrsLPW
I don't see anyone taking any pleasure in her personal heartache but she did set herself up in a precarious position with a false premis. I feel sorry for her and her girls but can't excuse her distorted doctrine.
Raven

[Mrs. LPW]

MrsLPW
I don't see anyone taking any pleasure in her personal heartache but she did set herself up in a precarious position with a false premis. I feel sorry for her and her girls but can't excuse her distorted doctrine.
Raven

If her personal trouble is because of something she believes or teaches or wrote or did... we're all in trouble brother.

Bringing personal heartache up on a forum about someones life.. is just plain uncharitable and therefore not Christlike in my opinion.

Have you read her book Raven?
Have you read her book CC!?

[SDG]

MrsLPW
I don't see anyone taking any pleasure in her personal heartache but she did set herself up in a precarious position with a false premis. I feel sorry for her and her girls but can't excuse her distorted doctrine.
Raven

There is no excuse that anyone can make for a doctrine the gives hair superanatural powers, makes it a source of God's glory and attaches angelic protection to it ...

None.

It's either denounced or you tacitly are endorsing false doctrine.

[CC1]

Have you read her book CC1?


Yes. I have her book and I have looked at her children's books also.

Her acceptance and promotion within the UPC is the most discouraging thing I have seen in that movement for decades.

Pastors and leaders have sold out and embraced heresey just because it supports the uncut hair doctrine and gives women reasons (false ones) to embrace having uncut hair.

Her leaps in logic are beyond understanding. It is a poorly written book that many supporters of the uncut hair doctrine don't embrace because of its gross error.

[CC1]

If her personal trouble is because of something she believes or teaches or wrote or did... we're all in trouble brother.

Bringing personal heartache up on a forum about someones life.. is just plain uncharitable and therefore not Christlike in my opinion.

Have you read her book Raven?
Have you read her book CC!?

Here is the difference. We don't proclaim that by having uncut hair we are given magical powers to protect ourselves and our families from moral failure. She did through examples she gave in the book.


I full well know that any of us are subject to either failure outselves if we don't keep the Lord on the throne of our lives or failure of loved ones if they don't do the same.

[Mrs. LPW]

If you can speak of someone's heartache and not feel the least bit sorry for it... than I shall leave it be, for you and the Lord to discuss.

God Bless, Good night!

[SDG]

Here is the difference. We don't proclaim that by having uncut hair we are given magical powers to protect ourselves and our families from moral failure. She did through examples she gave in the book.


I full well know that any of us are subject to either failure outselves if we don't keep the Lord on the throne of our lives or failure of loved ones if they don't do the same.

This is where she put herself in the precarious situation that Raven speaks of ...

She even gave testimonies ... of women who lost their husbands and linked it to their lack of Holiness ...

Hence opening the door to this type of scrutiny.

[CC1]

If you can speak of someone's heartache and not feel the least bit sorry for it... than I shall leave it be, for you and the Lord to discuss.

God Bless, Good night!

I am constantly amazed that there is no rightous indignation at the heresey this woman espouses at womans conferences all over the UPC.

Instead any mention of her is rebuked as just being mean to some poor lil ole sweet woman.

She may very well be a sweet woman who loves the Lord with all of her heart but her doctrines should be given proper scunity before being promoted and that has not happened.

Plus she needs to just be thankful that she has not been arrested by the fashion police for wearing those giant feathers for adornment!

[SDG]

I am constantly amazed that there is no rightous indignation at the heresey this woman espouses at womans conferences all over the UPC.

Instead any mention of her is rebuked as just being mean to some poor lil ole sweet woman.

She may very well be a sweet woman who loves the Lord with all of her heart but her doctrines should be given proper scunity before being promoted and that has not happened.

Every other wind of false doctrine is lambasted ... but this one remains untouchable because it's homegrown.

[Raven]

If her personal trouble is because of something she believes or teaches or wrote or did... we're all in trouble brother.

Bringing personal heartache up on a forum about someones life.. is just plain uncharitable and therefore not Christlike in my opinion.

Have you read her book Raven?
Have you read her book CC!?
MrsLPW
Yes, I read the book. [Twice] I would never just take someone else's "review" of a book.
I very rarely say anything negative on this forum and I don't, here, personally attack RR.
But I must say that the doctrine she espouses in her book is very dangerous and extremely erroneous. I am also troubled that it was sold through the Publishing House thus giving it "official sanction". If she still holds to this belief I pray that the Spirit of Truth washes her eyes that she might see. I only hope for her good!
Raven

[Hoovie]

Balanced? Was an article published by the Herald with the point of view that women aren't mandated by Scripture to wear long hair and dresses but to maintain their feminity while attired modestly for their culture?

Or by balanced do you mean that some of the articles were about outward standards and some about the heart? :cool:

Oh I am sure you could read it and critique every author, but as someone who did not have an agenda when reading it I was thinking "balance" rather than "mandates".

This balance is also found in, UPCI official, Ken Gurley's statement to the Chronicle.

The Herald does have some very good articles, and you do yourself a disservice to block them all simply because of a prior bias with the Herald being the "official" UPCI organ.

[CC1]

Every other wind of false doctrine is lambasted ... but this one remains untouchable because it's homegrown.

A couple of years ago I was shocked when I saw her entire lineup featured on the POA White Steeple Bookstore website.

They were heavily promoting her books including the children's books.

Many people who truly believe the uncut hair doctrine object to her teaching because it is so offbase it discredits that doctrine rather than strengthening it. I would have thought that the leadership at POA would have been in that group.

I just don't think her books have had much serious scrunity within the UPC because of her pedigree she wsa just promoted left and right.

[timlan2057]

I just don't think her books have had much serious scrunity within the UPC because of her pedigree she wsa just promoted left and right.

A parallel to that:

James Kilgore didn't realize it was the guy from Kansas who was one of the ramrodders of the 1992 Affirmation Statement.

He said: "Had I known that I would not have come out for it because he preaches the truth in a way that I don't want to be associated with."

Hard to believe that such a momentous resolution and he did no more research on it than that.

Urshan and the others knew if they could get Kilgore to speak for it, it would pass.

James Kilgore was and is an innocent and naive man in a lot of ways ... not really "street smart" when it comes to political brawling.

This Ruth Rieder thing is another where no one really objectively examines the ridiculousness of the doctrine if the gal has a pedigree.

[James Griffin]

But Dan's love attends a UPC church in California.

Dan's church is in Houston.

Not that I am saying he does have any at church, but just wanted to clarify.

So are we correct in saying then that UPC churches in California are as liberal and CHARISMATIC as Dan's church in Texas???

:happydance

Jax

I have never visited Pastor Hunt's church in California so I have no personal knowledge of their "dress code". I do know he is a great man and years ago was Jonathan Suber's youth pastor. I believe he also preached at the AWCF world conference a couple months ago.

The church where Dan is associate pastor is independent and while many on this forum would probably believe it to be leaning to the liberal side, Dan started Spanish services there a couple months ago and most attending that service are fairly conservative in appearance.

Any more details would probably best come from Dan himself since he did visit Pastor Hunt's church while in California.

[James Griffin]

Tim

Good to see you posting a little more often.

You have been missed hermano.

[James Griffin]

Cindy and Brian.

Thank you both for your kind comment.

[SDG]

Jax

I have never visited Pastor Hunt's church in California so I have no personal knowledge of their "dress code". I do know he is a great man and years ago was Jonathan Suber's youth pastor. I believe he also preached at the AWCF world conference a couple months ago.

The church where Dan is associate pastor is independent and while many on this forum would probably believe it to be leaning to the liberal side, Dan started Spanish services there a couple months ago and most attending that service are fairly conservative in appearance.

Any more details would probably best come from Dan himself since he did visit Pastor Hunt's church while in California.

Oh boy ... how do I live that one down!!!

[Sam]

T
...
Sometimes things happen for a reason and I am inclined to think that is the case here. I hope eventually some good comes from all of it.

I do not agree with the uncut hair theory proposed by her book.
Nor do I believe it gives "special" protective power as proposed by her book.
I also do not agree with the "magic hair" as presented in some churches, in an issue of the Pentecostal Herald, and in at least one UPC district publication.

But, what happened to the lady we are referencing might not be God trying to show her something. It could be an attack by the enemy. It could be a real trial of her faith, sorta like a preacher who is very strong on preaching healing and then one of his family members dies.

[Pressing-On]

I do not agree with the uncut hair theory proposed by her book.
Nor do I believe it gives "special" protective power as proposed by her book.
I also do not agree with the "magic hair" as presented in some churches, in an issue of the Pentecostal Herald, and in at least one UPC district publication.

But, what happened to the lady we are referencing might not be God trying to show her something. It could be an attack by the enemy. It could be a real trial of her faith, sorta like a preacher who is very strong on preaching healing and then one of his family members dies.

Excellent post, Sam. So, true! I've seen that happen!!!

[Sweet Pea]

I do not agree with the uncut hair theory proposed by her book.
Nor do I believe it gives "special" protective power as proposed by her book.
I also do not agree with the "magic hair" as presented in some churches, in an issue of the Pentecostal Herald, and in at least one UPC district publication.

But, what happened to the lady we are referencing might not be God trying to show her something. It could be an attack by the enemy. It could be a real trial of her faith, sorta like a preacher who is very strong on preaching healing and then one of his family members dies.


Thank you, Sam.....

[Sam]

...
Plus she needs to just be thankful that she has not been arrested by the fashion police for wearing those giant feathers for adornment!

Maybe it's the Indian in her.

[mizpeh]

Maybe it's the Indian in her.

:toofunny:toofunny:toofunny

[Mrs. LPW]

Maybe it's the Indian in her.

:toofunny


OH SHOOT, I said Goodnight to this thread...

wooops.

[Newman]

Oh I am sure you could read it and critique every author, but as someone who did not have an agenda when reading it I was thinking "balance" rather than "mandates".

This balance is also found in, UPCI official, Ken Gurley's statement to the Chronicle.

The Herald does have some very good articles, and you do yourself a disservice to block them all simply because of a prior bias with the Herald as the "official" UPCI organ.

Stephen Hoover- Please forgive the posts and continue status quo. Who am I to suggest that one's balance is another's limitation? Carry on... ;)

[Sam]

Is the Herald online ....


I thought I saw something in a previous issue of the Herald about it going to be online but I don't know if it is available yet.

[Hoovie]

Stephen Hoover- Please forgive the posts and continue status quo. Who am I to suggest that one's balance is another's limitation? Carry on... ;)

No, it's not status quo. That's what I am saying. There appeared to be a good balance in the magazine. The Herald is not the same as it's always been, and Gurley's statement was refreshingly reasonable. I am all for progress, but recognition should be given when we see it.

Good things DO come from Nazareth occasionally.

Did you READ the issue in question?

[Newman]

No, it's not status quo. That's what I am saying. There appeared to be a good balance in the magazine. The Herald is not the same as it's always been, and Gurley's statement was refreshingly reasonable. I am all for progress, but recognition should be given when we see it.

Good things DO come from Nazareth occasionally.

Did you READ the issue in question?

No, I did not. I was asking Pastor Poster how he defined balance (given that I hadn't seen the issue) and didn't know if it was the normal stuff about standards or if there was a mixture of issues pertaining to the heart.

I am unaware that anything but the status quo has been allowed in the Herald for many years now.

My post about the Texas Chronicle had to do with being linked to polygamists not about how the pastor responded.

I probably shouldn't be posting now that I am here so infrequently. My posts may come across too harshly because there hasn't been time for positive and/or fluffy ones to balance what I take issue with.

Hope the Hoover family continues to be blessed.... You all are wonderful! :rockband

[CC1]

Newman,

I for one am thrilled to see you posting. I have really missed your intellect and writing ability on here.

[jaxfam6]

Jax

I have never visited Pastor Hunt's church in California so I have no personal knowledge of their "dress code". I do know he is a great man and years ago was Jonathan Suber's youth pastor. I believe he also preached at the AWCF world conference a couple months ago.

The church where Dan is associate pastor is independent and while many on this forum would probably believe it to be leaning to the liberal side, Dan started Spanish services there a couple months ago and most attending that service are fairly conservative in appearance.

Any more details would probably best come from Dan himself since he did visit Pastor Hunt's church while in California.


I was not being serious with my remark Sir. I do hope others realized that as well.

[jaxfam6]

Oh boy ... how do I live that one down!!!

ARE YOU REALLY A CLOSET CONSERVATIVE??????

[Nahum]

No, I did not. I was asking Pastor Poster how he defined balance (given that I hadn't seen the issue) and didn't know if it was the normal stuff about standards or if there was a mixture of issues pertaining to the heart.

I am unaware that anything but the status quo has been allowed in the Herald for many years now.

My post about the Texas Chronicle had to do with being linked to polygamists not about how the pastor responded.

I probably shouldn't be posting now that I am here so infrequently. My posts may come across too harshly because there hasn't been time for positive and/or fluffy ones to balance what I take issue with.

Hope the Hoover family continues to be blessed.... You all are wonderful! :rockband

Newman, I am so sorry that I missed your original query.

How do I define balance?

I think you have read enough of my substantive posts (not many lately) to realize I am pretty left of center in regards to old-time standards.

This issue did not deal with specific standards. It dealt with holiness principles. I, personally, appreciated the way in which most articles were written. Of course there were some portions I disagreed with, but that is to be expected.

Overall, the tone and tenor of this issue of the Herald was very, very godly.

Brother WC Parkey had an excellent article regarding media and how we should not let it dictate our lifestyle. He was not judgemental or harsh in any way. He was simply Biblical.

Brother Cox wrote an article and included many sports analogies, which I found mind-blowing considering the magazine the article was published in.

I will try to get you and Brother Griffin a copy ASAP.

[El Predicador]

Oh boy ... how do I live that one down!!!

So appearing conservative is now something to be lived down?

[Cindy]

Cindy and Brian.

Thank you both for your kind comment.

You're more than welcome, truth is truth. You have taught me a lot, as well as a few others on this board.

[Cindy]

Cindy and Brian.

Thank you both for your kind comment.

Truth is truth brother, I am just glad I was prosecuted in Dallas instead of Houston back in the day...............:D

[James Griffin]

Truth is truth brother, I am just glad I was prosecuted in Dallas instead of Houston back in the day...............:D

Well depending on the year I may have been a defense attorney and gotten it dismissed for you.

:toofunny

[Cindy]

Well depending on the year I may have been a defense attorney and gotten it dismissed for you.

:toofunny

Nah, them off duty cops are well versed in sneaking up on you. I was caught red handed. But I can laugh about it now, but I still didn't like that one lady on the parole board..........:toofunny

[James Griffin]

Nah, them off duty cops are well versed in sneaking up on you. I was caught red handed. But I can laugh about it now, but I still didn't like that one lady on the parole board..........:toofunny

Even so they have to have probable cause to sneak up. :-)

Nonetheless, maybe getting caught and prosecuted was just what you needed at that time in your life.

God is good, all the time.

[Cindy]

Even so they have to have probable cause to sneak up. :-)

Nonetheless, maybe getting caught and prosecuted was just what you needed at that time in your life.

God is good, all the time.

He did have all his i"s dotted and t's crossed.
You are absolutely right, I would never have learned some lessons any other way, nor known some things and people to avoid.

Yes he is.

[HeavenlyOne]

Nah, them off duty cops are well versed in sneaking up on you. I was caught red handed. But I can laugh about it now, but I still didn't like that one lady on the parole board..........:toofunny

You are an ex con too?????

Oh my.....LOL!

[CC1]

Maybe it's the Indian in her.

ROFLMBO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[El Predicador]

So appearing conservative is now something to be lived down?

BUMP for Alicea

[AmazingGrace]

BUMP for Alicea

In his book yes!

[JennyUS]

There is many titles with the word holy or holiness why is that? Do people have problems in this area? So all I have to do is read one of those books and it will tell me how to be holy? That's just plain weird.

[SDG]

BUMP for Alicea

Being facetious. I think Jim brought it up to provide some balance.

I've been told that I do not tolerate other views yet I have no problem with conservative dress ... just extrabiblical teaching of it.

Say it's a conviction or a tradition ... don't make it salvific or bible.

[Jack Shephard]

I am constantly amazed that there is no rightous indignation at the heresey this woman espouses at womans conferences all over the UPC.
Instead any mention of her is rebuked as just being mean to some poor lil ole sweet woman.

She may very well be a sweet woman who loves the Lord with all of her heart but her doctrines should be given proper scunity before being promoted and that has not happened.

Plus she needs to just be thankful that she has not been arrested by the fashion police for wearing those giant feathers for adornment!

I agree. I was speaking with my mother-in-law about the hair issue. She does not exactly know what to think about the magic hair deal, but she did 'try' to point out that when the lady washed Jesus' feet, after pouring oil on them, that there was a reason she used her hair. She thinks that is shows the importance of the long hair thing. I told her that the point of that story was that she used expensive oil on His feet not the hair on her head. I did try and point out that the reason she did use her hair, besides maybe not having a towel was that she was using her head and placing it under Jesus, kinda like submitting herself to His authority. She tried to tell me that it was about the hair being placed under the authority and so on. I told her that is reading WAY between the lines. My mother-in-law trims her hair from time to time. I believe that the only 'power' that comes with the long hair is from the faith a person has in it.

[deltaguitar]

I agree. I was speaking with my mother-in-law about the hair issue. She does not exactly know what to think about the magic hair deal, but she did 'try' to point out that when the lady washed Jesus' feet, after pouring oil on them, that there was a reason she used her hair. She thinks that is shows the importance of the long hair thing. I told her that the point of that story was that she used expensive oil on His feet not the hair on her head. I did try and point out that the reason she did use her hair, besides maybe not having a towel was that she was using her head and placing it under Jesus, kinda like submitting herself to His authority. She tried to tell me that it was about the hair being placed under the authority and so on. I told her that is reading WAY between the lines. My mother-in-law trims her hair from time to time. I believe that the only 'power' that comes with the long hair is from the faith a person has in it.

Amazing. It would just be easier to say it is a tradition. At least it is more understandable.

[El Predicador]

I've been told that I do not tolerate other views


How could ANYONE every get that impression of YOU hermanito?????

[MissBrattified]

I am constantly amazed that there is no rightous indignation at the heresey this woman espouses at womans conferences all over the UPC.

Instead any mention of her is rebuked as just being mean to some poor lil ole sweet woman.

She may very well be a sweet woman who loves the Lord with all of her heart but her doctrines should be given proper scunity before being promoted and that has not happened.

Plus she needs to just be thankful that she has not been arrested by the fashion police for wearing those giant feathers for adornment!

Here's the deal, CC1. :) She IS a sweet woman who loves the Lord. She had/has a THEORY about what I Corinthians 11 REALLY means, and wrote about it. Nothing at all wrong with that. What is WRONG is that the organization, an entity made up of ministers who ought to know better, has not suppressed an unbiblical doctrine, but has endorsed it by allowing her to teach her opinions at organizational events, sell her books, and other ministers have actually jumped on the bandwagon WITH her.

THEY are the ones who need to be charged with subterfuge and spreading of false doctrine, not RH.

It is my opinion that the upci as a whole has allowed this to continue, unbiblical or not, because it supports and cements an existing rule in such a way that women are fearful NOT to follow it. I find that motive, if it does exist, to be morally repugnant and unethical.

[SDG]

How could ANYONE every get that impression of YOU hermanito?????

A la verdad no se mi querido colega en el Evangelio.

[mizpeh]

Here's the deal, CC1. :) She IS a sweet woman who loves the Lord. She had/has a THEORY about what I Corinthians 11 REALLY means, and wrote about it. Nothing at all wrong with that. What is WRONG is that the organization, an entity made up of ministers who ought to know better, has not suppressed an unbiblical doctrine, but has endorsed it by allowing her to teach her opinions at organizational events, sell her books, and other ministers have actually jumped on the bandwagon WITH her.

THEY are the ones who need to be charged with subterfuge and spreading of false doctrine, not RH.

It is my opinion that the upci as a whole has allowed this to continue, unbiblical or not, because it supports and cements an existing rule in such a way that women are fearful NOT to follow it. I find that motive, if it does exist, to be morally repugnant and unethical.And that none of the UPC Bible college instructors has spoken against, written an article or book in opposition to this is amazing and perhaps telling!

[CC1]

Here's the deal, CC1. :) She IS a sweet woman who loves the Lord. She had/has a THEORY about what I Corinthians 11 REALLY means, and wrote about it. Nothing at all wrong with that. What is WRONG is that the organization, an entity made up of ministers who ought to know better, has not suppressed an unbiblical doctrine, but has endorsed it by allowing her to teach her opinions at organizational events, sell her books, and other ministers have actually jumped on the bandwagon WITH her.

THEY are the ones who need to be charged with subterfuge and spreading of false doctrine, not RH.

It is my opinion that the upci as a whole has allowed this to continue, unbiblical or not, because it supports and cements an existing rule in such a way that women are fearful NOT to follow it. I find that motive, if it does exist, to be morally repugnant and unethical.

Your point is well taken. Howeve I do not excuse her from writing the heresey in the first place.

I agree 100% with your theory about why it continues.

[Raven]

Here's the deal, CC1. :) She IS a sweet woman who loves the Lord. She had/has a THEORY about what I Corinthians 11 REALLY means, and wrote about it. Nothing at all wrong with that. What is WRONG is that the organization, an entity made up of ministers who ought to know better, has not suppressed an unbiblical doctrine, but has endorsed it by allowing her to teach her opinions at organizational events, sell her books, and other ministers have actually jumped on the bandwagon WITH her.

THEY are the ones who need to be charged with subterfuge and spreading of false doctrine, not RH.

It is my opinion that the upci as a whole has allowed this to continue, unbiblical or not, because it supports and cements an existing rule in such a way that women are fearful NOT to follow it. I find that motive, if it does exist, to be morally repugnant and unethical.
MB
You said it correctly and very well. I agree with your opinion at the conclusion.
Raven

[CC1]

. I believe that the only 'power' that comes with the long hair is from the faith a person has in it.

Exactly!

[SDG]

It is my opinion that the upci as a whole has allowed this to continue, unbiblical or not, because it supports and cements an existing rule in such a way that women are fearful NOT to follow it. I find that motive, if it does exist, to be morally repugnant and unethical.

Pretty strong ... but the truth.

[Pastor Keith]

And that none of the UPC Bible college instructors has spoken against, written an article or book in opposition to this is amazing and perhaps telling!

Actually at CLC it has been addressed and been refuted by some of the instructors.

[mizpeh]

Actually at CLC it has been addressed and been refuted by some of the instructors.

That's good to hear! Are the articles or discussions online?

[CC1]

Actually at CLC it has been addressed and been refuted by some of the instructors.

Hmmmmm.....seems to me the kind of doctrine Jr. would jump on since it reinforces the uncut hair doctrine.

[Jack Shephard]

Amazing. It would just be easier to say it is a tradition. At least it is more understandable.

Tradition...yeah that was easy. LOL

I have no trouble with traditions, but when traditions become monuments to a movement or a movement by itself that is where tradition takes a dive. Jesus destroyed traditions of men. He loathes traditions and He never fit the traditions bill.

[rgcraig]

Hmmmmm.....seems to me the kind of doctrine Jr. would jump on since it reinforces the uncut hair doctrine.

He did say "some"

[MissBrattified]

Your point is well taken. Howeve I do not excuse her from writing the heresey in the first place.

Well, I don't necessarily agree that a person is wrong for voicing their understanding of scripture, even if they are way off in left field. In the ideal situation, her husband and/or pastor would have sat down with her, had a discussion, and said, "Hey, this is not biblical, you need to rethink things, and writing a book is a bad idea." However, from my understanding, her "pastor" was busy with other...things.

[rgcraig]

Well, I don't necessarily agree that a person is wrong for voicing their understanding of scripture, even if they are way off in left field. In the ideal situation, her husband and/or pastor would have sat down with her, had a discussion, and said, "Hey, this is not biblical, you need to rethink things, and writing a book is a bad idea." However, from my understanding, her "pastor" was busy with other...things.

LOL!

[RevDWW]

Hebrews 12:14 (KJV) 14 Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord:

Note to self: It's not just lack of holiness that will keep me from seeing the Lord, seems following peace with ALL men is part of the deal as well.

[dizzyde]

This month's Pentecostal Herald is dedicated to the topic, articles include:


A Holy Heart by Nancy Grandquist
A study in Holiness by Stanley Russell
Biblical Standards or Personal Preferences by Ron Mullins
Holy Men and Women by John Hanson
Humor Does not Justify Quenching the Spirit by Tim O'Daniel
Princess or Prostitute by Natalie Huckaby
The Sermon of His Life by Jason Cox
Don't Let the Media Press you into its Mold by W.C. Parkey
The Mixed Multitude by Darrell Johns
Whats for Dinner by Ruth Harvey

Haven't read through this thread, I'm sure it's been loads of fun, but just had to comment on the first post because it is my personal pet peeve. :drama

It is MULLINGS, please, not Mullins!!!!!! :girlytantrum

[StMark]

Haven't read through this thread, I'm sure it's been loads of fun, but just had to comment on the first post because it is my personal pet peeve. :drama

It is MULLINGS, please, not Mullins!!!!!! :girlytantrum


why is it such a PERSONAL pet peeve ????

[dizzyde]

why is it such a PERSONAL pet peeve ????

:nahnah

[AmazingGrace]

Haven't read through this thread, I'm sure it's been loads of fun, but just had to comment on the first post because it is my personal pet peeve. :drama

It is MULLINGS, please, not Mullins!!!!!! :girlytantrum


LOL... geeesh I wonder why? Is this a newly formed pet peeve or something thats been a lifelong issue? :bliss

[dizzyde]

LOL... geeesh I wonder why? Is this a newly formed pet peeve or something thats been a lifelong issue? :bliss

:blah

:toofunny :toofunny

Oh, I've always hated it!!! :happydance

[mizpeh]

:blah

:toofunny :toofunny

Oh, I've always hated it!!! :happydance

Can you post the article by Bro MULLINGS?

[dizzyde]

Can you post the article by Bro MULLINGS?

I might could get my hands on an original, unedited copy, I have sources... :happydance

STMark says they are Mafia sources, but he is wrong. :winkgrin

[mizpeh]

I might could get my hands on an original, unedited copy, I have sources... :happydance

STMark says they are Mafia sources, but he is wrong. :winkgrin

All of us who don't get the Herald would like to read a "balanced" view on holiness. :)

[dizzyde]

All of us who don't get the Herald would like to read a "balanced" view on holiness. :)

Well, as with everything else, balance is a matter of perspective. Which is why I tend to stay away from these discussions, for reasons that I have previously stated.

That being said, I probably could get the file and post it, but I am not sure how that works within the copyright laws and I CERTAINLY don't want to break any rules. Maybe someone who knows more than I do could enlighten me to the legalities of that? :gaga

[Nahum]

I think the most amazing thing about this thread is that people are actually WANTING to read the Herald!

:toofunny

[James Griffin]

Well, as with everything else, balance is a matter of perspective. Which is why I tend to stay away from these discussions, for reasons that I have previously stated.

That being said, I probably could get the file and post it, but I am not sure how that works within the copyright laws and I CERTAINLY don't want to break any rules. Maybe someone who knows more than I do could enlighten me to the legalities of that? :gaga

No violation with author's permission, unless he sold rights to the Herald in which case it would be prudent to get their written permission beforehand.

[dizzyde]

No violation with author's permission, unless he sold rights to the Herald in which case it would be prudent to get their written permission beforehand.

Thanks JG, I knew I could count on one of you smart guys! I'll have to work on the authors permission thing, I don't think any rights were sold, it isn't that big of a deal (I don't think)...

[Hoovie]

No, I did not. I was asking Pastor Poster how he defined balance (given that I hadn't seen the issue) and didn't know if it was the normal stuff about standards or if there was a mixture of issues pertaining to the heart.

I am unaware that anything but the status quo has been allowed in the Herald for many years now.

My post about the Texas Chronicle had to do with being linked to polygamists not about how the pastor responded.

I probably shouldn't be posting now that I am here so infrequently. My posts may come across too harshly because there hasn't been time for positive and/or fluffy ones to balance what I take issue with.

Hope the Hoover family continues to be blessed.... You all are wonderful! :rockband

Newman,

I for one am thrilled to see you posting. I have really missed your intellect and writing ability on here.


CC1, Amen! She has been an inspiration to me. I find it interesting that she does not fit the typical "liberal" mold.

So Newman, please do stop by more often, I enjoy your contribution and Bro Devito needs a sparring partner!

PS I also miss seeing others - like Advocate4veracity and Thirdgeneration

[HeavenlyOne]

CC1, Amen! She has been an inspiration to me. I find it interesting that she does not fit the typical "liberal" mold.

So Newman, please do stop by more often, I enjoy your contribution and Bro Devito needs a sparring partner!

PS I also miss seeing others - like Advocate4veracity and Thirdgeneration

Ah, you have been around for a while!!

[CC1]

I think the most amazing thing about this thread is that people are actually WANTING to read the Herald!

:toofunny

PeePee,

I have been pulled into it's orbit by the modernization program KH put the Herald on when he became GS.

Once they lost the 1960's font and black and white photographs it started grabbing my interest.

Although I must admit looking at a Herald in the 1980's or early 90's always took me back to my childhood at about 1965!

[dizzyde]

Can you post the article by Bro MULLINGS?

*Posted with authors permission*


Biblical Standards or Personal Preferences?
By Ron Mullings

When we look at the subject of holiness, the first requisite is that we understand it is not optional. The scripture is very specific when it commands us to be holy. (Romans 12:1, Psalms 29:2) Our holiness is to accomplish two things. It first separates us into God as detailed in Romans 12:1 and Ephesians 1:4. It then serves to witness to God’s life changing power to those that are without. (Hebrews 12:4 and Matthew 5:16) This is reinforced in God’s conversation with Samuel while choosing a new king. In 1Samuel 16:7, he says although God looks on the heart, man can only see the outward and since it is man that is our mission field this scripture underscores the importance of an outward witness.

In the pursuit of holiness, the New Testament provides us with basic standards of conduct that should be regarded as the minimum. We are not granted the privilege to pick or choose which to believe. Beyond those minimum commands the scriptures then tell us to “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.” (Philippians 2:12 KJV) In this quest God searches the heart of every man, discerning those aspects of each life where things are present that could impede their spiritual health. God uses His findings to give those individuals “conviction.” These become very relevant to your personal walk with God. “If our heart condemns us, God is greater than our heart.” (1 John 3:20 KJV) This is illustrated by the rich young ruler. Jesus discerned something in his heart regarding wealth. The result was the “conviction” to sell all he had and give to the poor. There was not a blanket commandment. He did not tell this to Nicodemas or Zacheaus. It was for the young man. The danger is that these “convicting” experiences with God are so powerful that is easy to begin to feel they must apply to everyone. Very probably if we could call the young ruler back today and ask him what a man must do to be saved, he would tell us to sell all we had and give to the poor. He would be wrong. That is not our “conviction,” it was his.

It is the devil’s business to disunite. I must guard against the temptation to place my “conviction” on a level with the eternally settled word of God. That was Jesus’ condemnation of the Pharisees. They taught as “doctrine” the commandments of men. They put their convictions on the same level as scripture. I have no more right to demand my brother embrace my “conviction” than he does to demand the same of me. My “convictions” are not only good, they are essential to “my salvation.” The important thing is to realize that God gave the “conviction” to meet a need in my life. I am privileged to take a stronger personal position than the scriptures require but I am not permitted to take a lesser one. While I should never be apologetic for my “conviction” I must guard against the temptations to judge my brother by them.

[Baron1710]

*Posted with authors permission*


Biblical Standards or Personal Preferences?
By Ron Mullings

When we look at the subject of holiness, the first requisite is that we understand it is not optional. The scripture is very specific when it commands us to be holy. (Romans 12:1, Psalms 29:2) Our holiness is to accomplish two things. It first separates us into God as detailed in Romans 12:1 and Ephesians 1:4. It then serves to witness to God’s life changing power to those that are without. (Hebrews 12:4 and Matthew 5:16) This is reinforced in God’s conversation with Samuel while choosing a new king. In 1Samuel 16:7, he says although God looks on the heart, man can only see the outward and since it is man that is our mission field this scripture underscores the importance of an outward witness.

In the pursuit of holiness, the New Testament provides us with basic standards of conduct that should be regarded as the minimum. We are not granted the privilege to pick or choose which to believe. Beyond those minimum commands the scriptures then tell us to “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.” (Philippians 2:12 KJV) In this quest God searches the heart of every man, discerning those aspects of each life where things are present that could impede their spiritual health. God uses His findings to give those individuals “conviction.” These become very relevant to your personal walk with God. “If our heart condemns us, God is greater than our heart.” (1 John 3:20 KJV) This is illustrated by the rich young ruler. Jesus discerned something in his heart regarding wealth. The result was the “conviction” to sell all he had and give to the poor. There was not a blanket commandment. He did not tell this to Nicodemas or Zacheaus. It was for the young man. The danger is that these “convicting” experiences with God are so powerful that is easy to begin to feel they must apply to everyone. Very probably if we could call the young ruler back today and ask him what a man must do to be saved, he would tell us to sell all we had and give to the poor. He would be wrong. That is not our “conviction,” it was his.

It is the devil’s business to disunite. I must guard against the temptation to place my “conviction” on a level with the eternally settled word of God. That was Jesus’ condemnation of the Pharisees. They taught as “doctrine” the commandments of men. They put their convictions on the same level as scripture. I have no more right to demand my brother embrace my “conviction” than he does to demand the same of me. My “convictions” are not only good, they are essential to “my salvation.” The important thing is to realize that God gave the “conviction” to meet a need in my life. I am privileged to take a stronger personal position than the scriptures require but I am not permitted to take a lesser one. While I should never be apologetic for my “conviction” I must guard against the temptations to judge my brother by them.

**This is not an attack on Bro. Mullings, I have nothing but good things to say about him.**

The bolded part is what I wish to address. I have no idea what Hebrews 12:4 has to do with outward standards, maybe someone can enlighten me on this. Maybe it was a typo. The next verse, Matthew 5:16 talks about letting our light shine through our works. I don't know how we get to holiness dress standards from this verse. (Yes I am assuming that is what is meant because of the next verse that is used about outward appearances)

The main verse being used is I Samuel 16:7, where Samuel is told man looks on the outward and god on the inward. This verse is turned on its ear to mean that man is right for looking on the outward and we should accommodate that with a peculiar style of dress, because after all that’s who we are reaching for. The entire second pillar of "to witness to God’s life changing power to those that are without" is based on an assumption that the current dress standards somehow show God’s life changing power. If I am a sinner and I see someone who dresses a certain way, yes I do make judgments about them, but this is based on my views of society. Do I see the FLDS ladies and think, “oh wow they are holy I want to be like them.” No, I think they are a little whacky however they dress and their throwback dresses only multiply it.

We don’t reach the world by the way we dress. Jesus said if I be lifted up I will draw all men unto me John 12:32. the most important way to show the world that we belong to Jesus is if we have love one for another. John 13:35
"By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another." It's not in the dress it's in the conduct.