"Beards are sin!" False doctrine?

[houston]

Originally Posted by Amanah

at FPC Palm Bay right now, men have beards for the Messiah Drama and are wearing them on the platform.

They grew them out for the play.

Convenient

[houston]

Originally Posted by Amanah

I'd worry more about attending charismatic house churches, or Trinitarian churches, or sitting at home in isolation and becoming whacked out.

Yep

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Amanah

and you feel you are the guide to show us the way?

Nope.

I do believe we should look to Scripture together. If it says nothing about beards being sin, those who teach such should be rebuked or rejected.

[Amanah]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Nope.

I do believe we should look to Scripture together. If it says nothing about beards being sin, those who teach such should be rebuked or rejected.

we will have to defer to the Elders.

[Godsdrummer]

This is so wrong people saying that they have never heard it preached against. When I was young our church was the only church that did not preach against facial hair in our state. But when I got my mistrial license I was told by my pastor that I would have to shave my mustache off. Not much has changed in the state, except some churches have gone independent.

I myself got out of UPCI years ago because of these false doctrines. You can go back and forth over this and other so called doctrines yet they are just man made doctrines that our just some mans interpretation of scripture, much like the Pharisee of Christ day.

[Godsdrummer]

Originally Posted by Amanah

we will have to defer to the Elders.

That is so wrong, we go against Christ own teaching when we do this.

Mat 20:25 But Jesus called them and said, You know that the rulers of the nations exercise dominion over them, and they who are great exercise authority over them.
Mat 20:26 However, it shall not be so among you. But whoever desires to be great among you, let him be your servant.
Mat 20:27 And whoever desires to be chief among you, let him be your servant;
Mat 20:28 even as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.

[consapente89]

This thread is pointless & is proving itself so. From naked breakfasts with your girlfriend, liberal sodomite politics, posting "readings" on psychic board, sprinkling or pouring "in Jesus name" and calling it baptism, Acts 2:38 a requirement unless God changes his mind, a bird landing on socialist Bernie Sanders as a sign of God's favor, etc...

I just honestly don't get how you can expect ANYONE to take you seriously.

[votivesoul]

There seems to me to be a question underneath the question. Is it a sin to be a man? To be masculine?

We might at first scoff at the sheer stupidity of the thought that such questions raise. But hold a moment and ask yourself: what is the currently most attacked and maligned and marginalized portion of society here in the USA?

It's the masculine, uncompromising alpha male. The "man" that is being held up in today's world as the pinnacle of masculinity is small, even petite, thin, no shoulders, weak chin, high voice, and could pass as a girl if called upon. The world used to want heroes, now it wants comforters and makers of safe spaces. Modern feminism seeks to emasculate men wholesale.

Men are biologically and genetically predisposed to grow facial hair. It comes as a result of the production of testosterone from within you know where, in particular, the metabolite of testosterone called DHT or dihydrotestosterone. Some men produce more than others, some men LOTS more than others, but all men produce some amount. To deny one's growth of facial hair can be a choice freely made, for the purpose of appearance or convenience, if one chooses.

But to slice and dice the God-given, naturally growing hair of the face because someone claims to have the right to control your appearance? That's something else entirely. Now, one enters the military, they are agreeing to that control. One takes a job with company that has a strict facial hair policy, again, they are agreeing to that control. But note! It's still a form of control.

And in the church, where we all see and recognize the activity of Jezebel, or of worldliness, metrosexuality, feminism, and etc. having gained a stronghold, maybe not locally at your particular place of meeting, but generally speaking, we can all speak to it existing and being a spiritual force which we must withstand.

And one of, if not the only way to do so, to withstand, is to un-emasculate and reinvigorate the men of the Body. And a way to do that is to simply let the testosterone of their genetic make-up have its way. Will it result in facial hair? Yes, it will.

But it will also affect bone density, deepening of voice, increase in the size of the adam's apple, shoulder width, give a man a healthy libido (to be used in the confines of the undefiled marriage bed), greater physical strength, and etc.

Effectively, it will naturally cause men to become men again. And the only thing I can think of that would be against such a thing is a spirit of misandry, call it Jezebel if you wish, but it's all the same. The head of every man is Christ, and the head of Christ is God, even as the head of every woman is the man. The man, that is, the married husband under Christ who is under God, has no authority over his own body, but rather, that power is given to the woman, the wife, and vice versa. No one else can claim such an authority. No one. And to emasculate a man and force him to be clean-shaven as an act of submission is to treat that man like a dog and in the process, hurt his marriage.

Over the years I've been in so many meetings and counseling sessions and whatever, where women whine and moan and berate their husbands for not this, not that, not whatever, complaining he's not spiritual enough, he doesn't pray enough, blah, blah, blah, blah. Women want their men to lead, but then find their men are programmed not to because a "head" other than Christ is making decisions for him that God alone has given that man to make.

Think about it for a moment. I was in a leadership meeting one time and the pastor, in front of their men, was ordering the women on what they can and cannot wear, what length their sleeves had to be, how long their skirts had to be, what they could mow the lawn in or do choirs in and what they could not.

And the worst part of such asinine bunk is people just absorbed it in like it was okay for one man who was not the head of any of those other women, to take control and have authority over their body, and dictate their appearance.

And we wonder why the church is becoming effeminate, why Jezebel is running loose, why men aren't leading in the homes and the church and everywhere else?! It's because our church paradigm has stomped on their you know whats and told them to lie down and take it (like a man???).

If people in the church at large are offended by men with beards, I submit that offense is rooted in anti-christ effeminate feminism and misandry. Why else is facial hair even as issue? Why else is facial hair one of the key litmus tests of one's submission to authority?

Because if a man who is not your head can make you shave your face or you cannot participate, minister, or even belong, he can control you (and your wife, implied) any way he wants.

So what is it then, brethren? For many, to have a beard is what? A SIGN OF REBELLION? To God? Nope! To Jesus? Nope! To the Apostles? Nope! To any part of the Bible whatsoever? Nope! The only way a beard gives off an alleged sign of rebellion is when the person offended by it realizes he cannot control that man as his head. That's it. End of story.

Brothers, shave if you want to. IF YOU WANT TO. That's between your head Jesus and your wife, if you're married. But likewise, brothers. Grow your beard IF YOU WANT TO. And if someone snaps on you and puts you down or puts you out, well, if you've read this, now you know the reason why. Strings attached Christianity means someone is pulling strings, and that's no different than a marionettist working his puppets, making them dance.

I've heard and read and listened to all the reasons why a pastor or a group of elders has the right to establish "standards" as they see fit, but the fact of the matter is, the only right anyone has is to point to the Holy Scriptures and let the Holy Spirit dictate the matter. Anything beyond the teachings of the Word is EXTRA-BIBLICAL. And doing or teaching anything extra-Biblical is heretical and even damning, as the case may be. If you want to invite that upon yourself, you be my guest. I will try to stand in the way for as long as I can or as long as the Lord allows, but anyone who is readily and easily jeopardizing their soul is already very hard to help, indeed.

Real men, men of God used to tremble at God's Word, and dare not add a single jot or tittle to it, lest they be plagued by God, or dare reduce it one iota, lest their names be stricken from the Book of Life.

Effeminate, weak, post-modern "men" of their own bellies do as they please, and tremble at nothing but their own narcissism.

People say having a beard is a sign of pride, ego, or arrogance and that's sin. No, that's not it at all. It's that not having one is (or can be), according to the Holy Scriptures, a sign of shame, dishonor, contempt, and humiliation, something King David understood, and something, I think, the Son of David understood, too, when the Romans ripped His beard out of His face when they reproached, degraded, humiliated, and tortured Him. His visage was marred worse than any man's, right? Such that he couldn't be recognized as a man.

So, let's be real about what's happening here. Men who are being forced to shave to join, be a part of, participate, minister, or lead in a church, aren't fully men at all. Their manhood is being eroded right from underneath them, and their headship is being usurped, as is the authority their wives, if married, have over their bodies. This is spiritual and it takes discernment to see it.

Maybe once upon a time in the 60's the counter-culture wore beards to make a statement and take a stand, and so, preachers naturally gravitated toward being clean-shaven to stand apart from that attitude. But in today's world, the counter-cultural revolution happening now is the skinny jeans-wearing, limp-wristed, snow-flaked millennials who high-five each other for successfully adulting a couple times a week, whose ability to reproduce is in question, who can't even grow peach fuzz because momma's fed them soy all their lives, and being androgynous is all the rave.

So, how about our preachers stand apart from that? What a stand for manhood might that be! Or did Jesus make a mistake calling hard, tough as nails, calloused, bearded, rough around the edges, worked hard, lived hard, men from Galilee for His apostles? Should He have called women?

[Amanah]

Brother Aaron, are you saying that growing a beard will cause the following effect:

"But it will also affect bone density, deepening of voice, increase in the size of the adam's apple, shoulder width, give a man a healthy libido (to be used in the confines of the undefiled marriage bed), greater physical strength, and etc."

Or am I misunderstanding you?

[Tithesmeister]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

There seems to me to be a question underneath the question. Is it a sin to be a man? To be masculine?

We might at first scoff at the sheer stupidity of the thought that such questions raise. But hold a moment and ask yourself: what is the currently most attacked and maligned and marginalized portion of society here in the USA?

It's the masculine, uncompromising alpha male. The "man" that is being held up in today's world as the pinnacle of masculinity is small, even petite, thin, no shoulders, weak chin, high voice, and could pass as a girl if called upon. The world used to want heroes, now it wants comforters and makers of safe spaces. Modern feminism seeks to emasculate men wholesale.

Men are biologically and genetically predisposed to grow facial hair. It comes as a result of the production of testosterone from within you know where, in particular, the metabolite of testosterone called DHT or dihydrotestosterone. Some men produce more than others, some men LOTS more than others, but all men produce some amount. To deny one's growth of facial hair can be a choice freely made, for the purpose of appearance or convenience, if one chooses.

But to slice and dice the God-given, naturally growing hair of the face because someone claims to have the right to control your appearance? That's something else entirely. Now, one enters the military, they are agreeing to that control. One takes a job with company that has a strict facial hair policy, again, they are agreeing to that control. But note! It's still a form of control.

And in the church, where we all see and recognize the activity of Jezebel, or of worldliness, metrosexuality, feminism, and etc. having gained a stronghold, maybe not locally at your particular place of meeting, but generally speaking, we can all speak to it existing and being a spiritual force which we must withstand.

And one of, if not the only way to do so, to withstand, is to un-emasculate and reinvigorate the men of the Body. And a way to do that is to simply let the testosterone of their genetic make-up have its way. Will it result in facial hair? Yes, it will.

But it will also affect bone density, deepening of voice, increase in the size of the adam's apple, shoulder width, give a man a healthy libido (to be used in the confines of the undefiled marriage bed), greater physical strength, and etc.

Effectively, it will naturally cause men to become men again. And the only thing I can think of that would be against such a thing is a spirit of misandry, call it Jezebel if you wish, but it's all the same. The head of every man is Christ, and the head of Christ is God, even as the head of every woman is the man. The man, that is, the married husband under Christ who is under God, has no authority over his own body, but rather, that power is given to the woman, the wife, and vice versa. No one else can claim such an authority. No one. And to emasculate a man and force him to be clean-shaven as an act of submission is to treat that man like a dog and in the process, hurt his marriage.

Over the years I've been in so many meetings and counseling sessions and whatever, where women whine and moan and berate their husbands for not this, not that, not whatever, complaining he's not spiritual enough, he doesn't pray enough, blah, blah, blah, blah. Women want their men to lead, but then find their men are programmed not to because a "head" other than Christ is making decisions for him that God alone has given that man to make.

Think about it for a moment. I was in a leadership meeting one time and the pastor, in front of their men, was ordering the women on what they can and cannot wear, what length their sleeves had to be, how long their skirts had to be, what they could mow the lawn in or do choirs in and what they could not.

And the worst part of such asinine bunk is people just absorbed it in like it was okay for one man who was not the head of any of those other women, to take control and have authority over their body, and dictate their appearance.

And we wonder why the church is becoming effeminate, why Jezebel is running loose, why men aren't leading in the homes and the church and everywhere else?! It's because our church paradigm has stomped on their you know whats and told them to lie down and take it (like a man???).

If people in the church at large are offended by men with beards, I submit that offense is rooted in anti-christ effeminate feminism and misandry. Why else is facial hair even as issue? Why else is facial hair one of the key litmus tests of one's submission to authority?

Because if a man who is not your head can make you shave your face or you cannot participate, minister, or even belong, he can control you (and your wife, implied) any way he wants.

So what is it then, brethren? For many, to have a beard is what? A SIGN OF REBELLION? To God? Nope! To Jesus? Nope! To the Apostles? Nope! To any part of the Bible whatsoever? Nope! The only way a beard gives off an alleged sign of rebellion is when the person offended by it realizes he cannot control that man as his head. That's it. End of story.

Brothers, shave if you want to. IF YOU WANT TO. That's between your head Jesus and your wife, if you're married. But likewise, brothers. Grow your beard IF YOU WANT TO. And if someone snaps on you and puts you down or puts you out, well, if you've read this, now you know the reason why. Strings attached Christianity means someone is pulling strings, and that's no different than a marionettist working his puppets, making them dance.

I've heard and read and listened to all the reasons why a pastor or a group of elders has the right to establish "standards" as they see fit, but the fact of the matter is, the only right anyone has is to point to the Holy Scriptures and let the Holy Spirit dictate the matter. Anything beyond the teachings of the Word is EXTRA-BIBLICAL. And doing or teaching anything extra-Biblical is heretical and even damning, as the case may be. If you want to invite that upon yourself, you be my guest. I will try to stand in the way for as long as I can or as long as the Lord allows, but anyone who is readily and easily jeopardizing their soul is already very hard to help, indeed.

Real men, men of God used to tremble at God's Word, and dare not add a single jot or tittle to it, lest they be plagued by God, or dare reduce it one iota, lest their names be stricken from the Book of Life.

Effeminate, weak, post-modern "men" of their own bellies do as they please, and tremble at nothing but their own narcissism.

People say having a beard is a sign of pride, ego, or arrogance and that's sin. No, that's not it at all. It's that not having one is (or can be), according to the Holy Scriptures, a sign of shame, dishonor, contempt, and humiliation, something King David understood, and something, I think, the Son of David understood, too, when the Romans ripped His beard out of His face when they reproached, degraded, humiliated, and tortured Him. His visage was marred worse than any man's, right? Such that he couldn't recognized as a man.

So, let's be real about what's happening here. Men who are being forced to shave to join, be a part of, participate, minister, or lead in a church, aren't fully men at all. Their manhood is being eroded right from underneath them, and their headship is being usurped, as is the authority their wives, if married, have over their bodies. This is spiritual and it takes discernment to see it.

Maybe once upon a time in the 60's the counter-culture wore beards to make a statement and take a stand, and so, preachers naturally gravitated toward being clean-shaven to stand apart from that attitude. But in today's world, the counter-cultural revolution happening now is the skinny jeans-wearing, limp-wristed, snow-flaked millennials who high-five each other for successfully adulting a couple times a week, whose ability to reproduce is in question, who can't even grow peach fuzz because momma's fed them soy all their lives, and being androgynous is all the rave.

So, how about our preachers stand apart from that? What a stand for manhood might that be! Or did Jesus make a mistake calling hard, tough as nails, calloused, bearded, rough around the edges, worked hard, lived hard, men from Galilee for His apostles? Should He have called women?

This is the best post on aff in recent memory.

Possibly ever!!!!!