Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 

Dan,

Couldn't someone say that these pictures and testimonies were isolated incidents and didn't represent a "true sample" of today's "Holiness Standards"?

Possibly these woman cut their hair before the "revelation" of 1 Corinthians 11?

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 

It's not a matter of being "bothered." It's a matter of discussion among other Apostolics about faulty interpretations of scripture, and damaging mission statements for the church.

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 

Are you still UPCI?
Shocking that your influence with your daughter hasn't gone anywhere. Maybe it speaks to your concern not to be pushy.

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 

great!

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 

Instead of asking Dan, ask these folks or their families.

There were many "revelations" that were given in the mid Twentieth Century. These "revelations" and innovations were sold to a younger generations as "The Old Paths" and such. The real history of the development of our "holiness standards" however is quite a bit different.

My wife's mother used to cut her hair. She cut my wife's older sisters hair regularly too. Then a "revelation" came along and my wife has never cut her hair even once in her entire life, same thing with my daughter.

If you ask them why they'll make a weak appeal to 1 Corinthians 11, but a stronger appeal to "tradition."

But just what kind of tradition is this that was introduced some time in the 1950's after the third sister was born and before the fourth? It's an innovation. Plain and simple.

So, let's be plain about that. Uncut hair on women is not some "old path" or "old timey tradition." It's as new as space rockets and satellites.

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 

Justin, is that true?

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 

I'm not UPCI, technically. I turned in my card back in the spring/late winter of 1998. As I've testified on here before, a preacher later made a false accusation against me from the pulpit in front of my children. I took it straight to the UPC District Board and pretty much demanded a review.

I was accepted for reinstatement, even with my "facial hair," but I did not pursue it further than that. Also, with the many changes that have been made over the last 20 years or so I probably wouldn't make a comfortable fit.

And notice: I haven't changed my doctrine. I still preach the same things I preached as a card carrying UPC man. The UPCI changed it's doctrine. So much for sticking to "the old paths."

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 

I was posing the question. I have no idea if it's true. But this would be a response I would expect to hear from those who uphold the current "Holiness Standards".

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 

Read the first sentence:

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 

Justin, what we find is two waves crashing at the merger when it came to how to view and teach holiness.

Initially, the PCI manual's verbiage on Holiness was adapted at the merger.

This is how it read in the PCI manual and the UPCI manual at the merger:

http://beforeyousignit.com/articles1952.jpg (PCI manual, circa early 1940's)

Notice they simply reiterated scripture with little commentary .... and this inferentially allows an indivual pastor to interpret and apply bible-based holiness as they deemed in their local congregations.

Quite frankly we cannot call these "revelations" new ... as we can find many who held dress standards before 1948 ... especially as taught and documented by some of the radicals of the pre-cursor Holiness movements.

These arguments regarding Holiness were very much part of the theological discussions among Methodists and others with Wesleyan roots in the 1800's and the turn of the century.

What we dont find .... is a pre-defined laundry list in the Articles Faith until nearly a decade after the merger .... until the resolution process was properly utilized and appeals by some who wanted "stronger" language to apply to all across the fellowship were institutie

.... in 1954 an amendment was added...

The Article of Holiness was amended to its present day language.

What is nefarious ... I believe .... is the attempt to whitewash, sanitize, censor and present the facts as if we were lockstep in what is the majority view today.

We find leadership of the pioneering OP Apostolic generation to hold markedly distinct views on Holiness and the New Birth ...

This is more about the will of a few or even a majority imposed on the rest of the organization ...

With direct democracy, comes as our founding fathers wrote about in the Federalist papers, the tyranny of the majority.

Tyranny of the majority leads to the group dynamic of peer pressure and ostracization.