I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

Prov 22:28
28 Remove not the ancient landmark, which thy fathers have set.

I find it interesting that many after being blessed by finding the Truth, begin to seek ways to change what they have received.

Men and women before us understood the strength in Holiness, both inside and out. They were wise enough to know that the NEW BIRTH experience was just the beginning. Men were to dress like men and women like women. Because this was right in the eyes to the LORD. And still is. Men and women were to dress modestly and still should. Uncut hair on a women was her covering and showed her submission to her head and long hair on a man was a shame and still is.

Just because culture changes it's view does not mean the church should or that GOD has.

I am progressive in the sense that I believe we should change our methods for reaching the world in need. I am an old time preacher in the sense that I do not believe we should ever change our MESSAGE, any of it.

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

I don't believe this stuff is "our message".

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

What is your message then?

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

Well, . . . I don't know all of your beliefs but the damage I have seen caused by the heritage that I assume you claim keeps me thanking God everyday that he allowed me to escape.

The ancient landmarks that I think you claim aren't really that ancient at all.

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

How far back in time do you go to take a snapshot and call that the "old landmarks"?

Is the use of electricity too modern? What about automobiles?

Do you want to go back to some of the early Apostolic/Pentecostal standards where it was wrong to wear gold rimmed glasses, wear a wrist watch, eat pork, drink cola and/or caffeine beverages, play softball or golf or checkers, wear anything red, have any type of life insurance, read any fictional literature, listen to a radio, visit a doctor or hospital, take any kind of medication whether prescribed or over the counter --even including aspirin or cough medicine, work on Sunday, etc? Or would you progress beyond that and drive in a stake in time in the mid nineteen forties and require men to have flat top haircuts and pencil thin mustaches, and require women to wear either cotton hose or nylon hose if it has seams, not allow women to use pink or pearl nail polish, require women to wear hats and gloves to church, etc.

These "old landmarks" change every couple of years.

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

The gospel - the death, burial & resurrection of Jesus Christ. The GOOD NEWS!

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

bh, Clinging to the old paths - a noble thing to be sure, but there are a few holes in your logic... exactly who are the "Men and women before us..."?

Are you only claiming those who agree with your current position today?

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

Yes, that is our message.
We could not save ourselves so Jesus came to save us by dying on the cross, being buried, and rising from the dead 3 days later.

Jesus is the TRUTH (John 14:6) and the Holy Ghost is the Spirit of TRUTH or Spirit of Jesus (John 14:17) , not some method, series of steps, or body of doctrine.

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

You wont find many that do agree with you on this "barely apostolic forum".....but I do.

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

There are still a lot of us who agree with you but you won't find them on AFF. Most here have adapted to the easy route.

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

I believe that i made my position clear. We should not blend into the world and say we are trying to be relevant. We should be Biblical in our stance. We should be modest. We can do all of this and win the world. What I have noticed is that most of the time when people have problems with what keeps us Biblical and distinct it is because they do not like submission. I do understand that anything can be taken to extremes. However if I am going to be extreme I do not want to be so exteme that I blend in to the world.

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

I agree...the ancient landmarks aren't the cultural dress standards of the 1840's, 1940's, or 1950's. Nor are they eccentric teachings about hair (don't get me started on this one).

The ancient Landmarks, in my opinion are ....

I. Acts 2:38

1. Repentance
2. Jesus name baptism
3. Holy Ghost infilling with speaking in other tongues

II. Loving the Lord your God will all your heart

1. You shall have no other gods before Me. (Oneness)
2. You shall not make idols or bow down to them, nor serve them. (Exclusive Christianity)
3. You shall not use the name of the Lord your God disrespectfully.(Reverence and Jesus name)
4. Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. (Worship)

III. Loving your neighbor as yourself

5. Honor your father and your mother. (Family)
6. You shall not murder. (Value of Life)
7. You shall not commit adultery. (Value of Marriage)
8. You shall not steal. (Respecting the property of others)
9. You shall not lie about your neighbor. (Honest)
10. You shall not lust for your neighbor's house, or his wife, or any
thing that is your neighbor's. (Contentment)

All the "standards" we embrace are not "biblical". They too are a snapshot of what was culturally expected when the movement was in it's beginnings.

IV. Christian modesty

1. In dress
2. In attitude
3. In lifestyle

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

I dare you to stand and look me in the eye and say we have taken "the easy route". Shows how much you know. Leaving what you have always known and loved to do what you feel God has called you to do is not the easy route. The easy thing would have been to stay and blend in and climb up the district ladder, which is what we were promised if we "played our cards right".

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

Bro. Howard Goss received the Holy Ghost Baptism in the early 1900's. The book The Winds of God was written by Ethel Goss and is about the early Pentecostal movement (1901-1914) in the life of her husband Howard A. Goss.The copyright date is 1958. This book is available from the Pentecostal Publishing House.

Howard Goss was, and is, considered a pioneer and a hero by quite a few people in the Pentecostal movement although many today would have no idea who he was.

In the early years of the Pentecostal movement a group of workers would go into an area and preach. They would go with no church invitation and no financial backing. They felt like they had a message to preach and that God would supply their needs. Their message was salvation, sanctification, healing, and the baptism of the Holy Spirit. It was called the Apostolic Faith even though it had nothing to do with later teaching on Oneness and baptism in Jesus' Name. Later it would be referred to by some as Full Gospel. Some times they could afford a building to hold meetings in and some times even a separate place to stay. Finances and food came in by the grace of God.

On page 69 of the book he talks about the way they dressed which is in marked contrast to the way some of the preachers preach about standards, clothing, jewelry, etc today. Years ago we used to refer to this as "clothes line preaching." Now I guess it's just considered preaching on standards.

"We did not wear uniforms. The lady workers dressed in the current fashions of the day, ...silks...satins...jewels or whatever they happened to possess. They were very smartly turned out, so that they made an impressive appearance on the streets where a large part of our work was conducted in the early years.

"It was not until long after, when former Holiness preachers had become part of us, that strict plainness of dress began to be taught.

"Although Entire Sanctification was preached at the beginning of the Movement, it was from a Wesleyan viewpoint, and had in it very little of the later Holiness Movement characteristics. Nothing was ever said about apparel, for everyone was so taken up with the Lord that mode of dress seemingly never occurred to any of us."

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

The easy route is to have someone else decide all the rules for you, never question anything, live up to the outward standards and treat others any way you want to. The real test is when you work hard to build character, reputation, and integrity. That's the hardest part - working on the inside. The outside part is not that big a deal. Or it wasn't for me. By "standards" I suppose most would consider me moderate to conservative or ultra conservative maybe - but I love this forum because it allows for people to be themselves. God allows for more flexibility in some things than some men do.

The message is the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Yes, I love the Acts 2:38 message but the gospel and the message are so much more than that.

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

I would totally agree that the dress standards (holiness ) from the 1840,1940 or 50's . They are much older than that. However a women can dress like a women, in dresses and skirts and still look fashionable. A man can look like a man and still look trendy. Then biggest problem is that teaching on this subject has been harsh and hurtful in the past.

I agree with every thing you mentioned as landmarks. But we can not leave off ones we do not like.

GOD BLESS

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

Good post, TL!

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

That is why I started this thread. I am new to this forum and I know that I will not make any friends with this thread, but I wanted to see how liberal people here were. I have my answer.

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

Do you believe that a man could wear women's slacks?

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

Hey, you might like it here. I miss many of the conservatives who used to be here. Why can't we talk about things about which we agree? I love Jesus Christ. You love Jesus Christ. I won't be unfriendly to anyone. I have Friends in the real world who are conservative and I have Friends in the real world who are liberal. Jesus was a Friend to Sinners (not saying you are a sinner by the way).....Even if you think we're sinners, stay around and post. :thumbsup

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

I would not say you have taken an easy way. But I would say you have taken a way that is more pleasing to the world. I mean no offense by that. Just how I see it.

I am not sure what makes this forum Apostolic. From everything I have seen so far people here detest everything that makes Apostolics who they are.

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

Hey, welcome aboard! God bless you bro.

Here's a little about my family. I don't wear shorts unless I'm swimming or at the beach. I wear a T-shirt if in mixed company at the beach or the pool. I do wear short sleeves on occasion. My wife has cut hair just below her shoulders and wears a touch of make-up occasionally. The only jewelry she wears is a wedding band (mine doesn't fit anymore, I lost over 70 pounds last year). She also doesn't wear "pants" unless she's working out (all women). She wouldn't think of wearing pants to church or out and about. Her blouses are conservative in neckline and sleeve length.

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

NO I am not. How ever It is clear that there should be clothing that is distinctly mens and distinctly womens.

If women have dress and skirts. Plus wear pants. Then men have nothing that is distinct to men. This is a problem.

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

No offense bro...but this is only if your measure of being "Apostolic" is strictly based on the way they dress. ;)

Most here are strong advocate of Oneness and Acts 2:38 to the core.

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

Ideed, there is no reason we can't all be polite and coordinate - not because we agree exactly - but in spite of it.

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

I believe in repentance, Jesus' name baptism and receiving the Holy Ghost with speaking in tongues. That makes me "apostolic" I guess. I also believe in living a holy, separated and sanctified life. It's just that my definition of that differs from yours. You interpret the scriptures one way; I interpret them another. That doesn't make me any more worldly than you, just different. I hope I am nothing like the world's system; because I live everyday to please the Lord.

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

Demanding upon the Victorian standard for the placement of a woman's inseam seems to be a silly preoccupation to me. What of the "holiness" people in the 1800's who complained about the styles that were current then and longed for their own "old landmarks?"

The statement you cite in Proverbs involved respecting another man's fields and inheritance. Another verse just a bit further: Proverbs 23:10, clearly shows that the landmark was to keep people from stealing land and crops from those who were weaker than they. Job 24:2 echoes this same concern.

So when we look at the history of the Apostolic Faith movement and see that history being rewritten as it is here, or being covered up and even just forgotten - how should we respond?

When some one says - The Bogomils and Albigensians were One God tongue talking people - they are removing important and very old landmarks.

When they airbrush out Sister Morgan's discrete pearl necklace from the pictures at UPC HQ - they are removing our landmarks.

When they hide the facts about the true teachings and writings of men like A.D Urshan, Howard Goss, John Dearing, Frank Ewart and so many others - they are removing the old landmarks.

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

I agree! I mean, I get along great with all of you charismatics, oh, I mean, fellow AFFers!








sorry, I couldn't resist! :ursofunny j/k

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

See that is the problem you don't all even agree with the basic doctrine. I do not believe dress is the only thing that defines us but I do believe it to be apart of it. God was concerned with it so I am.

I do appreciate your spirit. I do not mean to be offensive. I am just passionate.

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

bh, this forum truly is no place for this discussion because they will slam you to kingdom come and say they are being Christlike about it. I was a lurker long before I joined.

I too believe in holding to the old paths, but even when I have seen people write personal testimonies of their own convictions I have seen the people on here tell them that what they experienced was not real.

For example, myself.....when I was 13 I trimmed my hair and God lifted the anointing from me for 1 year. When I would sing, there was no anointing. Now, someone on here will say that is not true as though I don't know my own relationship with God and don't really know what happened to me. Sad.

Anyways, I am with ya bro. I have had too many friends who walked away from exterior consecration and they have lost their anointing. I will not argue the point with ANYONE!

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

lol

You know we're just having a good conversation. I mean no offense in any of this, though I might use some strong words at some point to drive home a point. If women's "pants" aren't distinctively female then you're asserting that men can wear them. If you argue that men shouldn't wear women's pants, you're affirming that women's pants are distinctively female. Besides, my studies have indicated that pants were originally designed in ancient China for women working in the rice patties. The Chinese cavalry eventually took these pants and began wearing them as part of horse riding attire. Soon this caught on through most of the civilized world as part of riding attire, primarily worn by military men on horseback. Interestingly, hose were originally worn by men...but today are strictly worn by women. lol

I'm curious, where do you believe that the Bible requires this "distinction"?

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

If you are interested in how we dress - I would say there is some variety - no doubt.

My wife and girls wear long hair and skirts only. I shun them (skirts) - donning them only when acting on stage :)... sometimes it's required when depicting the Biblical period scenes.

Welcome my friend - we are much more alike than different.

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

I won't argue it with anyone either. AND I don't doubt your story. I believe that God requires things from some of us that He doesn't require from others. There are convictions that I have that I will not change, no matter what all my ministry friends do.

I think the whole issue on here is that we would like to be considered brothers and sisters. We are willing to accept you as brothers/sisters, and would just like to feel that you accept us too. We love the Lord every bit as much as you do.

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

Glad to find a couple that agree with me. I suspected this was not the forum for this topic. That is why I started it. I want to see where the majority was.

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

That's all good brother. God bless you. Let's continue to talk and share our perspectives. I used to be an ultra-conservative. At the very least I can show you why my beliefs have changed a little. Not to say you're absolutely wrong, but to share what I believe the Lord has shown me.

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

The majority from what I've seen is LIBERAL.

There was one obnoxious guy who they banned. Glad he's gone. Don't even know why he called himself a Christian. He was crude and mean about everything.

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

My dear friend I believe you know where I will go in the Bible for this. I have things I could say about your argument, but it is just that an argument. I do not want to do that and neither do you. we will not change eachothers minds.
I have found out what I wanted .

GOD bless and good night.

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

I wear cloths.



Sometimes.

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

Seriously though, I hope that you pick up one VERY important fact as a result of this thread you started.....

.....you weren't banned for starting it!

Now if "I" went onto a conservative apostolic board and dared question some "old landmark" (circa, 1950's) "standard", I would be corrected, chastised, and subsequently banned in rapid order.

Re: I refuse to remove the landmarks
 

I love it when new people come to the forum. Let's all make them welcome!

You know...

God loves people - any shape, any color, any size.
You don't have to be an angel, to be really special in His eyes.
He said in John 3:16 and He proved it on Calvary.
God loves people, ordinary people - people like you and me!