Read Segraves on "letting down hair"

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by BobDylan

Any place you hear or read or see LS say "uncut hair", just replace it with "obedience and submission", or "obedient and submissive", and see if you would then agree with his point? The fact is, that "uncut hair" is an issue of "obedience and submission", and this is the whole point LS is driving at. You cannot claim to be totally "obedient and submitted" without subscribing to the instructions of 1 Cor 11. Obedience and submission IS the issue LS is dealing with, and other parts of his message enumerate it as such directly conntected with uncut hair. Disregarding this part of the connection obscures the points he is trying to make!

He associates the angelic protection with the HAIR not "her obedience":..if that was the case why not cover more ground like not committing adultery, not lying, not gossiping? Sure we got churches full of uncut hair and bobby pins flying everywhere but that does not make them obedient! Yet that is what LS isolates as the REASON why they have angelic protection AND LS says it "flows OUT from THEM"...from the women! Not from God, it flows OUT from the woman...

That we are protected not because WE (men) are obedient but because a woman has uncut hair.

[berkeley]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

That we are protected not because WE (men) are obedient but because a woman has uncut hair.

Hey, your protection is rolling back in time... from your future wife.. have faith my brother!!

On a more serious note. I have been in situations that I know I wouldn't have made it through if it weren't for the angel of the LORD. Yes, I said it.

[BobDylan]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

He associates the angelic protection with the HAIR not "her obedience":..if that was the case why not cover more ground like not committing adultery, not lying, not gossiping? Sure we got churches full of uncut hair and bobby pins flying everywhere but that does not make them obedient! Yet that is what LS isolates as the REASON why they have angelic protection AND LS says it "flows OUT from THEM"...from the women! Not from God, it flows OUT from the woman...

That we are protected not because WE (men) are obedient but because a woman has uncut hair.

I'm not disagreeing with what you are saying, for all of those issues are issues of submission and obedience. LS has addressed these at times when he has preached other sermons. This particular sermon is about principles and applications in the context of obedience and submission to Christs headship in the text of 1 Cor 11. The primary issue that marks submission and obedience presented in that particular text is the hair issue... That is why in this sermon LS deals with the issue of uncut hair on women and short hair on men primarily. I've heard him preach about gossip, adultery, fornication, etc.... And there is a time or those sermons as well as there is a time for the order of creation sermon of 1 Cor 11...

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by BobDylan

I'm not disagreeing with what you are saying, for all of those issues are issues of submission and obedience. LS has addressed these at times when he has preached other sermons. This particular sermon is about principles and applications in the context of obedience and submission to Christs headship in the text of 1 Cor 11. The primary issue that marks submission and
obedience presented in that particular text is the hair issue... That is why in this sermon LS deals with the issue of uncut hair on women and short hair on men primarily. I've heard him preach about gossip, adultery, fornication, etc.... And there is a time or those sermons as well as there is a time for the order of creation sermon of 1 Cor 11...

IN his other sermons did he say "Ladies if you are obedient in not gossiping, there is a power of angelic protection that flows out of you over the whole Christian community"?

[BobDylan]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

IN his other sermons did he say "Ladies if you are obedient in not gossiping, there is a power of angelic protection that flows out of you over the whole Christian community"?

Irrelevant. The verbiage of 1 Cor 11:10, however one may interpret the verse, is directly in the purview of a message or sermon centered around the principles and instruction in immediate context of that verse. A message about adultery or gossip would naturally be couched in scriptural language introduced in the context where these issues are addressed. Similarly, a message about authority, submission, and obedience from the text of 1 Cor 11 is going to be framed in the concepts and verbiage introduced in that passage...

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by BobDylan

Irrelevant. The verbiage of 1 Cor 11:10, however one may interpret the verse, is directly in the purview of a message or sermon centered around the principles and instruction in immediate context of that verse. A message about adultery or gossip would naturally be couched in scriptural language introduced in the context where these issues are addressed. Similarly, a message about authority, submission, and obedience from the text of 1 Cor 11 is going to be framed in the concepts and verbiage introduced in that passage...

Irrelevant? You keep arguing this is all about obedience and submission, then you bring up that he preaches they should be obedient to the other things too but you failed to answer the question which proves my point.

The point is, what the issue is here is NOT obedience or submission. The point is what we have said it is from the beginning, the point you keep obfuscating. That LS is teaching a direct connection to uncut hair this whole business of protection, NOT obedience...uncut hair. If it was obedience you would have answered my question with a YES.

LS does not say "it's your obedience". He does not say "There is authority in your obedience"

He says it's your uncut hair. That was why he quote witchcraft. That was why he supposedly "went to the greek". He says it FLOWS FROM HER to the christian community.

What a load of rubbish. That is false doctrine, completely unbiblical

Further in the past you have tried to say we have authority in the spirit world, whatever that means, because of our obedience.

So here again then your answer SHOULD have been YES. You are acting as LS's Apologist so you are the one making this an issue of obedience.

Again if that is the case then it is NOT irrelevant.

You are attempting to spin doctor what LS has taught and Im not sure why. Do you get paid? Is he a close friend and asked you to clean up his mess?

[BobDylan]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Irrelevant? You keep arguing this is all about obedience and submission, then you bring up that he preaches they should be obedient to the other things too but you failed to answer the question which proves my point.

I did answer your question... The language of 1 Cor 11:10, which evidently you have a problem with, IS directly connected to any message preached from the text, and whether he uses that language in messages about gossip, or adultery, or other areas of obedience is irrelevant. We aren't speaking of those areas of obedience regarding this particular sermon of LS. We are speaking of the areas of obedience directly addressed in 1 Cor 11, and that is the distinct and proper grooming of hair for the relative genders. In that context, which is directly associated with authority and submission per the immediate context, the language of 1 Cor 11:10 is introduced. It is absolutely appropriate to cite, exegete, and preach the language of 1 Cor 11:10 in this context, whether or not he does so in another context. Your question is irrelevant, and is a blatant attempt to obsuscate while trying to accuse me of obfuscating...

Originally Posted by Praxeas

The point is, what the issue is here is NOT obedience or submission. The point is what we have said it is from the beginning, the point you keep obfuscating. That LS is teaching a direct connection to uncut hair this whole business of protection, NOT obedience...uncut hair. If it was obedience you would have answered my question with a YES.

Let me try to explain this in kindergarten terms... From the context of 1 Cor 11, uncut hair on women and short hair on men is the direct application of the principle of submission and authority. You cannot seperate the two issues. At the beginning of LS message, he lays a foundation of order of creation, authority, and submission to that order and authority. This is the basis and foundation of his preaching on "uncut hair". HE MAKES THE CONNECTION WHEN HE FIRST DEALS WITH THE SUBJECT. That inextricable connection carries through the message. From that point on, when LS speaks of uncut hair on women and short hair on men in his message, obedience and submission to authority is implied. Uncut hair and short hair on men cannot be seperated from the principle of authority and obedience any more water baptism for the remission of sins can be seperated from the blood of Christ.

Originally Posted by Praxeas

LS does not say "it's your obedience". He does not say "There is authority in your obedience"

He says it's your uncut hair. That was why he quote witchcraft. That was why he supposedly "went to the greek". He says it FLOWS FROM HER to the christian community.

Uncut hair IS an issue of obedience. LS lays a foundation at the beginning of his message about God's order in creation, submission to that order, authority, and headship, before he ever gets to the issue of uncut hair. This IS the foundation and basis of his message. You cannot seperate the application of uncut hair for women and short hair for men from the foundation of obedience, submission, authority, and order. LS doesn't seperate it, that's why he takes the time to lay the foundation IN THE FIRST PLACE.

BTW, how do you know exactly "why" LS quoted witchcraft? Did you ask him if this was why? Or are you making assumptions? I already explaing "why" I think he appealed to witchcraft, and thas was to show that their feable magic that they try to perform and manipulate by appealing to God's order in nature is nothing because "we have the Word of God", and "we have more power than anything else in the world" (these are verbatim quotes approx 23 min into the Memphis message). He was making an attempt to appeal to a cliche model that is commonly used by preachers. It's almost identically parallel to the cliche, "if they can jump and shout, and hoop and holler and cheer their team to victory at the football games of this world, what can some Holy Ghost filled saints of God do if we'd come into this place and worship God like there was no tomorrow... we've got the Word of God and we have more power than anything else in the world!"

If you are going to quote LS, quote him verbatim, and consider offering a link to the source, and the approx. time he supposedly made the statement, otherwise I'll consider what you say "he said" and heresay and inaccurate, and with libellous intent. There is no reason to immediately jump to the worst possible way of interpreting LS intent... which is exactly what you are doing? Why? Why would you not give a man who has given his life to this gospel and movement the benefit of the doubt here without jumping to the most ignoble of conclusions? It speaks more of your character than it does his... I am sure if you had some ideas, or approaches, or cliches, or misspoke on a few occasions, he would give you the benefit of the doubt as well, I think it would be appropriate to do the same for him. If you want to know exactly "why" he cited witchcraft resources, don't try to offer your opinion, ask him. If you didn't get the motivation from him, you do yourself well to refrain from judgment.

Originally Posted by Praxeas

What a load of rubbish. That is false doctrine, completely unbiblical

Further in the past you have tried to say we have authority in the spirit world, whatever that means, because of our obedience.

So here again then your answer SHOULD have been YES. You are acting as LS's Apologist so you are the one making this an issue of obedience.

Again if that is the case then it is NOT irrelevant.

You are attempting to spin doctor what LS has taught and Im not sure why. Do you get paid? Is he a close friend and asked you to clean up his mess?

I've met LS and shaken his hand only twice in my life. That is as many times as I have heard him speak in person. I was invited by a pastor friend a couple weeks ago to visit a church where he was ministering, and heard him speak on the hair issue. My pastor friend said "here is the magic hair message". He then asked me to listen, examine, and tell him what I thought.

I have viewed HMH threads here, and other forums in the past, and was disinterested because it just isn't my main interest, personalities and agendas... and that is what I perceived this whole debate to be about initially. When I heard the message, felt confirmation in my spirit about the sincerity of the message, the accuracy of the presentation, and the move of God confirming the message (I personally prayed with two who ended up praying through, and another who is claiming an instantaneous miraculous healing, having surgery scheduled this month for a serious injury, but now having cancelled the surgery). I have since been interested in investigating this subject.

Two mornings later I wrote the "magic holy benches" satirical peice after having started a couple of provocative articles regarding this message on a couple other forums. I have since then been catching up on the information, considerations, clips, testimonies etc. Yes, I am a johnny come lately in the HMH debate, but as they say, better late than never. I am not a LS apologist, am not getting paid, have no connections with LS. In fact, I come from a very conservative pentecostal background who generally are not LS fans.

I am trying to take an objective look at this as I am reasoning through this as I go along, examining the evidence, reading articles, engaging in the discussion, attempting to give LS the benefit of the doubt, arguing on his behalf where I think I can, and as I have done often over the last week or so, acknowledging problematic language, illustrations, and acts that have and are taking place surrounding this issue. If you want any more information, PM, I'll give it to you... but any personal information you would like from me, I would simply ask you to provide the same about you!

That's the deal in a nutshell...

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by BobDylan

I did answer your question... The language of 1 Cor 11:10, which evidently you have a problem with, IS directly connected to any message preached from the text, and whether he uses that language in messages about gossip, or adultery, or other areas of obedience is irrelevant. We aren't speaking of those areas of obedience regarding this particular sermon of LS. We are speaking of the areas of obedience directly addressed in 1 Cor 11, and that is the distinct and proper grooming of hair for the relative genders. In that context, which is directly associated with authority and submission per the immediate context, the language of 1 Cor 11:10 is introduced. It is absolutely appropriate to cite, exegete, and preach the language of 1 Cor 11:10 in this context, whether or not he does so in another context. Your question is irrelevant, and is a blatant attempt to obsuscate while trying to accuse me of obfuscating...

You made this whole thing about what LS teaches and the authority about obedience. You obfuscate the fact or spin doctor it, that LS makes authority NOT about obedience but about uncut hair. Again this is made acutely obvious when he cites resources on witchcraft and the hair. He does NOT make it merely about obedience for if he did he would in his sermons on obedience to other issues like not committing adultery, mention that if you are obedient you will have authority.

Let me try to explain this in kindergarten terms...

Everyone here realizes that the only reason you resorted to sophomoric attempts at being pejorative above is you really have a losing case.

From the context of 1 Cor 11, uncut hair on women and short hair on men is the direct application of the principle of submission and authority.

prove it! This man, BobDylan, has made several assertions and has been asked to prove it and not once has he. Further the context here is not about hair but headship. BD doesn't catch the error he just made as well...if it's really about what you just said and this is the correlation with authority, Paul would have argued WE have authority because WE obey this law of short hair on men and uncut hair on women. He does not.

You cannot seperate the two issues. At the beginning of LS message, he lays a foundation of order of creation, authority, and submission to that order and authority.

Quote him please.

This is the basis and foundation of his preaching on "uncut hair".

The issue isn't that women should obey and not cut their hair. The context however in 1cor is headship and order of creation, the hair stuff follows THAT.

HE MAKES THE CONNECTION WHEN HE FIRST DEALS WITH THE SUBJECT. That inextricable connection carries through the message. From that point on, when LS speaks of uncut hair on women and short hair on men in his message, obedience and submission to authority is implied. Uncut hair and short hair on men cannot be seperated from the principle of authority and obedience any more water baptism for the remission of sins can be seperated from the blood of Christ.

Quote him please. You say "implied" but really that to everyone here means "This is how Im spinning it". It's your assertion but you can assert all day long. You might as well assert LS was teaching that green cows with wings fly out of his rear end on the last day of each month...PROOF is essential. All you are doing is telling us what LS "really meant"...good grief I can spin what anyone says...that does not make it true. Was LS really, in your opinion, THAT vague, that you can tell us what he IMPLIED contrary to what it seems to everyone else here? Not to mention the myriads of women OUT THERE that are posting how they have supernatural power in their hair, that it's not their obedience but their uncut hair?

LS does NOT say ANY TIME "Ladies, you have POWER because you have obeyed"

He makes an emphatic argument that Ladies have POWER due to uncut hair AND that it's really all about the hair. How do we know? Because as part of his "setting up" for his delivery he quotes sources on witchcraft who all say there is something special about the HAIR! Not that there is something special about obeying God.

BTW, how do you know exactly "why" LS quoted witchcraft? Did you ask him if this was why?

how do you know exactly why LS starts with a foundation of obedience and submission? Did you ask him why? Gee...you know you could be right, Maybe LS just threw that stuff in about a witches hair for absolutely NO REASON related to his message on hair.

Good grief

Or are you making assumptions? I already explaing "why" I think he appealed to witchcraft, and thas was to show that their feable magic that they try to perform and manipulate by appealing to God's order in nature is nothing because "we have the Word of God", and "we have more power than anything else in the world" (these are verbatim quotes approx 23 min into the Memphis message).

"why I think"? Eh...so you did not ask LS why? Hey. LS did not quote anything saying "witches have power" he quoted the resources where witches believe they have special powers IN THEIR HAIR, HAIR. Get it? HAIR.

Before we get back into what LS said and why he quotes sources on witches. Consider also this OTHER proponent on this doctrine of power in uncut hair

“I decided to go directly to the public library to look in the witchcraft section. As I approached the occult section you could just feel the demonic spirits. First I prayed against the wickedness I sensed and anointed the area with oil where the occult books were so that I could think clearly to start my search. To my surprise, I found many references concerning hair. I was amazed; and at times dumbfounded!”
I thought to myself, “If only Christians knew what the witches knew.”
-Juli Jasinski

How do you spin that? What do witches know that we should? Hmmm?

Here is what LS says
"Let's talk about the spiritual significance of hair"..why? What POSSIBLE reason could LS want to talk about that in this message on a woman's uncut hair? That was certainly unfortunate to interject something that has NOTHING to do with his message? Clearly this is a PART OF HIS MESSAGE

It pertains to what he wants to get across about HAIR.

The Spiritual significance of HAIR..what does he quote? He quotes extra biblical sources on the occult.

"Let's talk about the SPIRITUAL significance of hair. If only Christians knew what witches and new agers know"

Tell us Mr Spindoctor, what do witches and new agers know that we do not.

"They don't seem to get the message but they KNOW THINGS" huh? LS is saying they know things...what things do THEY know that Christians do not? Unfortunate? Yes it is but it was also a part of his message. He introduces it to set up what he wants US TO KNOW about hair.

"They (witches) know there is power on the head because of what we do with our hair"

He does not say "they know there is authority in obedience"

He does not say "They are mistaken"

He says THEY KNOW! THEY KNOW!

"What God meant for good (power on the head because of what we do with our hair) the devil wants to use for evil"

Nothing there about obedience

Consider the last thing LS says

"Think of the “classic image” of a witch … it is a woman with long, scraggly uncut hair. WHY? Because the evil side of the supernatural realm knows there is power associated with hair!"

LS says the evil side KNOWS there is power associated with hair..They KNOW that. LS does not say "they are mistaken in that, the power is associated with obedience".

BD it's obvious to anyone that can read WHY LS quoted all that junk.