Read Segraves on "letting down hair"

[DAII]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

That is unfortunate.

What I do see is that people are still receiving the Holy Ghost, still being healed, still finding answers. KH preached at a ladies prison and 45 women received the Holy Ghost. In the midst of her misunderstanding this passage of scripture, God is still moving.

That is why, while I do rejoice to hear good reports from other church types, it doesn't mean that they have all of truth. People can hear that you don't need the Holy Ghost for salvation, it's only for empowerment, but if they are hungry, they will be filled. God is responding to a hungry heart. Catholics are receiving His spirit - He will pour out His Spirit!

Someone needs to send KH a copy of Daniel Segraves' article in the Herald!!

I think the key here is faith ....

Jesus was moved to operate in the miraculous even among the unbelievers ... how many unbeliever Gentiles experience a miracle ... not because they were obedient disciples or operated in authority?

God move in spite of us very often ... despite our whacky doctrines and even among sinful men ... We know of ministers who have been involved in affairs ... bound by alcoholism who in spite of this God works in the supernatural.

None of this excuses teaching irresponsibly or wreckless with unsound, heretical doctrine.

Yes, send her a copy of DS' article.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by DAII

I think the key here is faith ....

Jesus was moved to operate in the miraculous even among the unbelievers ... how many unbeliever Gentiles experience a miracle ... not because they were obedient disciples or operated in authority?

God move in spite of us very often ... despite our whacky doctrines and even among sinful men ... We know of ministers who have been involved in affairs ... bound by alcoholism who in spite of this God works in the supernatural.

None of this excuses teaching irresponsibly or wreckless with unsound, heretical doctrine.

Yes, send her a copy of DS' article.

I agree, Daniel - faith is the key. A move of God isn't always a stamp of approval for everything that is taught and preached. That includes all churches and not just the UPCI, I might add. That is a given.

And you are right - no excuse for being irresponsible with doctrine. I won't say wreckless for KH. I think she has misunderstood this having a heritage that goes way back. She just needs someone to kindly take her aside and show her where she is in error. God is building a church and IMO, this needs to come to a head in order to correct it.

We have a tendency to view trouble as the end all, when it only stands out for our attention and needed correction. That is a necessary life skill for many things that crop up in our lives and in the church.

I agree with these points made by DKB in his article, The Bible’s Teaching about Hair Length: Culture or Command?, which is linked in the first post of this thread.

• A woman is to respect the leadership of her own husband (Ephesians 5:22; Colossians 3:18; I Peter 3:1).
  
• Salvation is not based on hair length but on a continuing relationship of faith in Jesus Christ.
  
• If obedience is a sign of faith, does this mean that obedience in this matter can guarantee answers to prayer? Again, this question is based on a faulty premise. When we pray, we are not rewarded for our works, but we depend upon God’s grace. Moreover, God is sovereign; we cannot manipulate His actions.
  
• There have been reports of women letting down their long hair as part of making a specific, urgent prayer request. If the idea was to obligate God to answer prayer or to create a new method of praying, then this action was misguided. If instead it was a spontaneous act to confirm their consecration, then it could have been a legitimate means of expressing and focusing faith.

The part I highlighted in red, while I don't necessarily disagree, I certainly wouldn't promote this act. I have actually done this very thing, years ago! Kneeling by the side of the bed, I took down my hair and said, "God! See? I haven't cut my hair! Why won't you do something in this situation?!"

I then realized that I cannot walk around a trial. I must walk through it, with His grace and mercy. I, especially, must walk through it having faith that God will be with me. My long hair is not going to give me any special privileges while I am being perfected. He is the Potter and I am the Clay. No getting around that!

So, for me, the hair issue is disturbing. My husband, yesterday, said, "Somebody better get a brain!" I asked him, "What are we going to do about this?" His response, "We are going to sit back, relax and see if it is taken care of. We'll make a decision when we need to make it."

[JN Anderson]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Segraves states that this issue is so sensitive that he feels he cannot identify the author of a document detailing several references to the occult to support using a woman's uncut hair as a magical talisman.

From the citations to "shaking it in the wind" - it seems that LS may have read the same source material. And, this is the subject of discussion at the UPCI's seminary symposium, a forum where doctrinal controversies are aired out. Yet some will say that DAII is the one who "invented" this controversy.

Since DAII wasn't even referenced in the symposium papers it seems that this controversy really does exist and that it exists with or without DAII's participation in the debate.

Very true pelathias. There were several voices in the UPC who were speaking against the issue that didn't even know DAII and probably were saying so before DAII was.

[DAII]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I agree, Daniel - faith is the key. A move of God isn't always a stamp of approval for everything that is taught and preached. That includes all churches and not just the UPCI, I might add. That is a given.

And you are right - no excuse for being irresponsible with doctrine. I won't say wreckless for KH. I think she has misunderstood this having a heritage that goes way back. She just needs someone to kindly take her aside and show her where she is in error. God is building a church and IMO, this needs to come to a head in order to correct it.

We have a tendency to view trouble as the end all, when it only stands out for our attention and needed correction. That is a necessary life skill for many things that crop up in our lives and in the church.

I agree with these points made by DKB in his article, The Bible’s Teaching about Hair Length: Culture or Command?, which is linked in the first post of this thread.

• A woman is to respect the leadership of her own husband (Ephesians 5:22; Colossians 3:18; I Peter 3:1).
  
• Salvation is not based on hair length but on a continuing relationship of faith in Jesus Christ.
  
• If obedience is a sign of faith, does this mean that obedience in this matter can guarantee answers to prayer? Again, this question is based on a faulty premise. When we pray, we are not rewarded for our works, but we depend upon God’s grace. Moreover, God is sovereign; we cannot manipulate His actions.
  
• There have been reports of women letting down their long hair as part of making a specific, urgent prayer request. If the idea was to obligate God to answer prayer or to create a new method of praying, then this action was misguided. If instead it was a spontaneous act to confirm their consecration, then it could have been a legitimate means of expressing and focusing faith.

The part I highlighted in red, while I don't necessarily disagree, I certainly wouldn't promote this act. I have actually done this very thing, years ago! Kneeling by the side of the bed, I took down my hair and said, "God! See? I haven't cut my hair! Why won't you do something in this situation?!"

I then realized that I cannot walk around a trial. I must walk through it, with His grace and mercy. I, especially, must walk through it having faith that God will be with me. My long hair is not going to give me any special privileges while I am being perfected. He is the Potter and I am the Clay. No getting around that!

So, for me, the hair issue is disturbing. My husband, yesterday, said, "Somebody better get a brain!" I asked him, "What are we going to do about this?" His response, "We are going to sit back, relax and see if it is taken care of. We'll make a decision when we need to make it."

Amen. I also think DKB who is an excellent parser of words chose the word "spontaneous" deliberately ...

What we are seeing as DS states in his response is not spontaneous but rather encouraged, celebrated and pre-meditated.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by DAII

Amen. I also think DKB who is an excellent parser of words chose the word "spontaneous" deliberately ...

What we are seeing as DS states in his response is not spontaneous but rather encouraged, celebrated and pre-meditated.

Well, you know that my husband and I really like and respect DKB. (lol) We've worked with him and he is very kind, patient and thorough. I think that he really loves God and because of that, I have no problems with DKB.

I'm not sure that I could, emphatically, say that DKB used the word "spontaneous" deliberately. I was acting "spontaneously" when I took my hair down to prove to God that I was obedient. But, if you are saying that the "underlying" act is encouraged, you could be right about that. It's a subtle thing, I think.

We have such wonderful and powerful things going on, it's a shame that this could try to derail it all. I hope that it doesn't. We don't need this to prove anything.

[Pressing-On]

I'm not sure what I think about Seagraves interpretation of "head" in I Cor 11. He is leaning toward "source", which could, in some cases, be seen in that light. I did agree with everything else he wrote in, Letting Our Hair Down:Another Look at I Corinthians 11:2-16

However, when I view Ephesians 5:23 and Colossians 1:18, I'm not sure that I wouldn't interpret that as "headship" and/or "submission".

Ephesians 5:23 "For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body."

Colossians 1:18 "And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

He speaks of the "man" and "woman" not specifically meaning a "husband" and "wife", but when you read I Cor 11:9;11 it seems to imply that it is referring to a "husband" and "wife". If not, then why would verse 9 say, in essence, the same as in Genesis?

I Cor 11:9 "Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man."

Genesis 1:27 "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. (28) And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth,..."

Vines says, "As to I Cor. 11:10, taken in connection with the context, the word "authority" probably stands, by metonymy, for a sign of authority (R.V.), the angels being witness of the pre-eminent relationship as established by God in the creation of man as just mentioned, with the spiritual significance regarding the position of Christ in relation to the Church; cp. Eph 3:10; it is used of Christ as the foundation of the spiritual building set forth by the Temple, with its "corner stone," Matthew 21:42;"

[berkeley]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

LS "cued" the ladies near the end...the title of the message was something about real power, the body of the message was this stuff about uncut hair. He preached the entire message to the woman and they ended the "party" by letting down their hair so there would be a powerful move at the alter call

I think that was the last time or one of the last times I ever went to a meeting where LS was preaching. It was a let down.

[BobDylan]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

That is unfortunate.

What I do see is that people are still receiving the Holy Ghost, still being healed, still finding answers. KH preached at a ladies prison and 45 women received the Holy Ghost. In the midst of her misunderstanding this passage of scripture, God is still moving.

That is why, while I do rejoice to hear good reports from other church types, it doesn't mean that they have all of truth. People can hear that you don't need the Holy Ghost for salvation, it's only for empowerment, but if they are hungry, they will be filled. God is responding to a hungry heart. Catholics are receiving His spirit - He will pour out His Spirit!

Someone needs to send KH a copy of Daniel Segraves' article in the Herald!!

It is clear there is disagreement between Brothers Bernard and Seagraves over the act of "letting hair down" as a means of focusing faith. While KH's position may not be consistent with DS's position, it is likely she is consistent with DKB. There should some flexibility offered for individual understanding between DKB's and DS's positions on "letting down hair". Therefre it should not be necessary to sen KH a copy of DS, without sending a copy of DKB as well!

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by BobDylan

It is clear there is disagreement between Brothers Bernard and Seagraves over the act of "letting hair down" as a means of focusing faith. While KH's position may not be consistent with DS's position, it is likely she is consistent with DKB. There should some flexibility offered for individual understanding between DKB's and DS's positions on "letting down hair". Therefre it should not be necessary to sen KH a copy of DS, without sending a copy of DKB as well!

This is what Seagraves says that he and DKB agree on:

Here is where we agree: (1) the text is relevant for the church in all cultures and time periods. Paul’s words are not couched in the language of culture but of creation and nature; (2) long hair (from komaō and komē) refers to uncut hair ; (3) there is no magic formula enabling us to obtain whatever we want when we want it; God cannot be obligated to answer prayer.
"Letting Our Hair Down: Another Look at 1 Corinthians 11:20-16"
http://www.ugst.org/page.cfm?p=613

The only difference they have is the definition of "head". DS is saying that it is "source" at the beginning of I Cor 11. I'm not sure that I agree with DS on that, although, he asks some good questions. I'm wondering if they are necessary questions after reading the overall text. I'm still studying on that portion of the paper.

Now, I have heard for myself, that LS likens our hair, on the same level as a witch, to the power the witch holds in her hair. Whether or not they do is not the question here. LS believes they do. It appears that KH is in agreement with LS and that is where the disconnect and error lies.

It is a fine line, from what I've seen, on the individual interpretation. That is where the subtle error can remain floating if we don't lock it down. Some have explained to me that their obedience is their "power". That still does not make it correct to define "power" as "miraculous" in I Cor 11.

DKB defines "power" as "authority". It appears that LS and KH define "power" as "miraculous power" found in the Book of Acts. Not the same thing - at all! I Cor 11 and Acts do not use the same definition.

They both need to read the article!

[tv1a]

I think the more important topic is the Apostolic response to Christian rap
lol