Read Segraves on "letting down hair"

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

This is destroying the idea of God's order of creation. This is feminizing the church more than it already had been.

[Elizabeth]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

This is destroying the idea of God's order of creation. This is feminizing the church more than it already had been. My bible says CALL FOR THE ELDERS to pray, not CALL FOR THE SPLIT ENDZ

That is a VERY good point! It is taking away the importance of the Male role in church.

[*AQuietPlace*]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Now, I really have to log out! lol

[*AQuietPlace*]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

My bible says CALL FOR THE ELDERS to pray, not CALL FOR THE SPLIT ENDZ

Maybe the Split Endz could travel with the Power Team.

[Elizabeth]

Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace*

Maybe the Split Endz could travel with the Power Team.

[dizzyde]

Originally Posted by BobDylan

If you want to go back, and find the post in the interaction between you and I where the tone deteriorated, I can guarantee it will be yours. I have repeatedly said that I tend to match the rhetoric directed toward me.... Cordial with cordiality, respectful with respectfulness, snipe with reprisal. It's my style Dizzy... I am not saying that I may not occasionally deviate from that pattern, but much more often than not I don't! You were very creative in the selection of posts you chose to present.... I simply went back a couple pages and grabbed the last two where Phelps identified me personally...

I really am ready to let this go, but as you continually repeat that you were just following my "tone," I really have to point out our first interactions on the thread that you started on this topic.

I don't see how you can disagree that my "tone" towards you changed right about the time you started accusing me of being defamatory and libelous. I don't know why I am bothering, because I am sure that you will find some way to twist this as well, but the persecution complex routine is more than a little disingenuous.

This is one of the reasons that I usually do not let myself get involved in these threads, regardless of the fact that I do have very strong feelings on the subject.

Originally Posted by dizzyde

I have been at several of these Visalia conferences in the past (not this weekend) and while I have no idea what was taught this time, I DO know what I heard with my own ears the times that I have attended.

You are correct in saying he doesn't say those exact words, however, he absolutely taught the idea of those words. I was appalled, and I will again say, this was a long time before I ever heard of Dan. I can remember discussing it heatedly on the way home, extremely upset over the false doctrine and adding to the scripture.

I am not trying to discredit the man, I have met him and he seems to be very sincere. However, sincerity does not excuse bending the word of God to your own purpose or idea. It is astonishing to me that this is not completely clear to anyone who owns a Bible.

Originally Posted by dizzyde

I have heard him preach on about 4 or 5 occasions over the years. 3 of those times he made this topic the main portion of his sermon.

BTW, I tried to ignore this false teaching and give him opportunity to change his approach, because I was urged to give him another shot. The last time I heard him was about 3 or 4 years ago, and I said "never again." I am not going to sit and listen to the Word of God being twisted. In point of fact, any of the times I have heard him, the Word of God was only briefly visited, the majority of the sermon is occupied with stories and third party anecdotes. (many of which are very questionable.)

And for the record, I attend a church pastored by a UPC licensed preacher who teaches against cutting your hair. But he would never propagate this false doctrine.

Originally Posted by dizzyde

I want to go on record that I have very clearly heard LS say with my own ears that the power of a mothers uncut hair saved her son from a fatal car accident. That the car was lifted in the air and moved out of harms way, and this was because his mother had never cut her hair.

At the service he was saying this, I knew the man that he was speaking of was dying at a young age from an incurable disease. (he died shortly thereafter.)
Soooo, his mothers uncut hair saved him from a car wreck, but could not save him from disease? You cannot say that he never said anything like this, I heard it with my own ears.

Please be aware, I believe in healing! I just believe that it comes out the will of of God, by the power of His blood and stripes. Nothing I could ever do or not do would make me worthy of receiving His healing, it is only by His power and will that it will ever occur!

Originally Posted by BobDylan

Bro, please don't say some flagrantly defamatory unless you can prove it. Did LS say "the power of a mother's uncut hair saved her son from a fatal car accident"? Or is this what you took from it? I heard LS appeal to the same story, and what I heard was "the prayers of this mother, who have lived a life of faithfulness before God, were answered and God raised up her son from a near fatal car accident." Of course, if you want we could go to the clip and transcribe LS's statements and see exactly what he said instead of just making assumptions and libelous statements.




Was this his exact words, or your take on what he said?



I agree with this to an extent!

Originally Posted by BobDylan

This is what I am getting at... WHAT FALSE DOCTRINE? I agree as much as anyone else that there is no "power in the hair" alone... LS, RR, nor anyone else has said, written, or published that "teaching". However what I have heard and seen alluded to is that through obedience and sumission to God's Word, we have the power of the creator of the universe backing up our prayers and faithfulness. To stretch and twist that concept and make it say "power in uncut hair alone" is disingenuous and falacious. None of the people being libelled have suggested this. It is the conflagration of men's imaginations...

Originally Posted by dizzyde

I said I was there, I assumed nothing. BTW, I'm not a BRO.




Because his mother had never cut her hair was exactly the thought and implication!! Exact words, I cannot repeat, I did say it was 3 or more years ago, and I definitely did not buy the tape. There was absolutely no question of what he was saying, everyone that I was with heard the same thing.

Why would I make something like that up? I am not trying to justify anything, and I have never in my life tried to openly contradict a preacher, but this is just too much.




??? You agree that we are only healed by the blood and the stripes of Christ, to an extent???

Originally Posted by dizzyde

I imagined NOTHING! You are completely disregarding what everyone is saying to you, because it does not fit what you want to believe. I will give you this, I don't know what YOU have heard the man say, but I KNOW what I have heard him say.

[BobDylan]

Originally Posted by Edward Anglin

PO, Bob seems to be a good guy. Rather intelligent. Loves a good argument.

Trouble is, he's full of it (and no I won't define what "it" is).

He came on AFF with both barrels blasting, running his mouth and burning up his keyboard. He entered the convo as if he knew something everybody else didn't. Time has proven he didn't know squat.

It is still a magic hair message. Witchcraft is still a major component of each message preached about this topic. Women are shaking their hair, and laying their hair on objects and people just as they have been told to.

It's not a minor misunderstanding. It's major false doctrine.

It places faith in objects instead of God. It worships creation instead of the Creator.

This is the kind of erratic alarmism I was "blasting both barrells" at, and will continue to do so. Witchcraft is NOT a component of "each message" preached about this topic. In fact, when I heard it in person, witchcraft was not even mentioned.

If women are shaking hair, laying hair, or whatever as a means of focusing faith to believe for miracles, I have no problem with that. These effusive acts aren't alarming to me any more than people laying in Peter's shadows for healing, or sending Paul's handkercheifs and apron is alarming to me... I guess Peter's and Paul's followers were putting their faith in the object of Peter's shadow, or Paul's handkerchiefs, rather than in "God"??? I guess these people were worshipping "Peter" rather than the creator? HILARIOUS!!! ...

Ed, if I'm full of "it", you just wallowed in "it"... and "no I am not going to define what 'it' is"... You're the one, both barrells blasting, entering into a conversation nearing page 40 now, thinking you know something you don't know. I suggest you take a good dose of your own medicine before your incontrovertably anemic acumen becomes unpalatable and boring...

And FTR, I sure do love a good argument! I just wish you were a more formidable "opponend" (as in the argument, not in person).

[Michael Phelps]

Originally Posted by BobDylan

I think your assessment is accurate here PO. Thanks...

BD, I do have a serious question for you, it's a three parter:

1.) Do you believe that an unsaved woman with uncut hair has power with angels?

2.) Do you believe that a saved woman with cut hair has power with angels?

3.) Do you believe that it takes BOTH uncut hair and salvation to have this power?

[BobDylan]

Originally Posted by dizzyde

I really am ready to let this go, but as you continually repeat that you were just following my "tone," I really have to point out our first interactions on the thread that you started on this topic.

I don't see how you can disagree that my "tone" towards you changed right about the time you started accusing me of being defamatory and libelous. I don't know why I am bothering, because I am sure that you will find some way to twist this as well, but the persecution complex routine is more than a little disingenuous.

This is one of the reasons that I usually do not let myself get involved in these threads, regardless of the fact that I do have very strong feelings on the subject.

I said "flagrantly defamatory" in response to a NOT verbatim, subjective assessment of LS's statement about the "power of a mother's uncut hair" saving her son from an auto accident. I asked for transcribed, verbatim quotes.... in lieu of that, IMO, your subjective assement was flagrant and defamatory, attributing a "statement" to LS that he may or may not have made verbatim. Libelous, IMO, would be crediting LS with saying something he did not verbatim say. I was taking issue with your STATEMENTS, not you! I guess you are of the opinion that we do not need to be accountable for what we say? I was simply holding you to account for those statements, and hoping my strong language would encourage your efforts in more accurately supporting those assertions.

[BobDylan]

Originally Posted by Michael Phelps

BD, I do have a serious question for you, it's a three parter:

1.) Do you believe that an unsaved woman with uncut hair has power with angels?

No...

Originally Posted by Michael Phelps

2.) Do you believe that a saved woman with cut hair has power with angels?

I believe a saved woman, converted according to Acts 2:38 that is moving in the direction of christian maturity, whethor or not she has recently cut her hair, has authority in the spirit realm because of the obedience and submission she has in her life at that point.

Originally Posted by Michael Phelps

3.) Do you believe that it takes BOTH uncut hair and salvation to have this power?

As a woman is directed by the Spirit to 1 Cor 11, either through preaching, discipleship, or her own consecration and study (after conversion), and she rejects the admonitions of order of creation compliance, including uncut hair from 1 Cor 11, the authority she has in the spirit realm will wane. If she (or a man who refuses to keep his hair short) continually rejects these scriptural instructions, it will only affect them adversely spiritually...

I didn't answer your question the way you worded it, but I hope you can understand the sentiment behind my verbiage.