Read Segraves on "letting down hair"

[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 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.

[EA]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Edward,
I really don't think he is doing that. I am seeing a very subtle error in this teaching. When you teach that "for this cause" is talking about angels and hair instead of identifying that as the order of creation and gender disctinction, it can only bring out this subtle teaching.

I think BD is starting to identify that as he has not been taught correctly. At least I hope this is the case.

I doubt very many people, including a host of women, have ever looked at verse 10 and even tried to identify the "cause" spoken of.

It's so subtle that someone can look at you and say, "But, my submission does bring power."

Do you see how subtle that is? The whole thing was presented in the wrong way and it is very easy, if you aren't paying attention, to do it! This is very scary, I think.

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.

[Pressing-On]

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.

Edward,
I've carefully followed his posts and I see him wavering because elements of both are making sense to him. He isn't going to let go and support any one view until he is sure. That is how I'm reading what he is saying and doing here.

I just do not have the right words to express the subtility of this teaching. I was standing next to a woman who was buying into that. She was viewing the "uncut" as "submission" and not realizing that she is placing more emphasis on herself and her power with the angels, which really overrides her husband's authority. She is thinking her focus is on Jesus Christ, but it really isn't. I just don't have the words to express what I am trying to convey. I feel so frustrated. I see the mindset, the feeling, the understanding, but I can't put words to it.

[BobDylan]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Edward,
I've carefully followed his posts and I see him wavering because elements of both are making sense to him. He isn't going to let go and support any one view until he is sure. That is how I'm reading what he is saying and doing here.

I hope anyone could appreciate the prudence of reserving judgment until all the evidence has been submitted and weighed out!

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I just do not have the right words to express the subtility of this teaching. I was standing next to a woman who was buying into that. She was viewing the "uncut" as "submission" and not realizing that she is placing more emphasis on herself and her power with the angels, which really overrides her husband's authority. She is thinking her focus is on Jesus Christ, but it really isn't. I just don't have the words to express what I am trying to convey. I feel so frustrated. I see the mindset, the feeling, the understanding, but I can't put words to it.

I see what you are saying...

[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).

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by BobDylan

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!!! ...

I don't believe it would be advantageous to word what you are saying in this way. It only comes across as promoting the action. No good can come of that.

We have examples, as we've stated already, of handkerchiefs and aprons. We do not have examples of hair being used accept to wipe the feet of Jesus.

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

David K. Bernard: 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.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by BobDylan

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).

I have a problem with it, the reason is they are objectifying their own hair

Im also a little leary of phrases like "focus your faith" which is unbiblical.

Does a woman's hair somehow help them focus their faith more on Christ? How?

Our faith should be In Him and Him alone...it seems that, even in "focusing" faith they are under the impression that hair has something to do with it. Why not use a sock? Clearly because they have been led to believe there is something special to do with HER hair.

Can I rub my short hair and expect a miracle?

All these examples really sound like objectifying woman's hair...it also sounds proud or even boastful.


That might be where the "magic" comes into play in the accusations. In fact it could be idolatry. Jews had that problem with Aaron's rod. Catholics objectify relics and expect miracles. They objectify statues and expect miracles. They objectify water from Lourdes

Magic practioners use talismans not just because they think

Focus talisman

A talisman is an object, often a crystal or gemstone, that has a specific ability to aid a person in focusing and amplifying his or her power. A talisman is not a lucky rock. The power of a talisman is its ability to aid you in achieving the future you desire.

A talisman is both a focus and a natural amplifier.

A talisman is an amplifier of the Universal Life Force

As an amplifier, a talisman brings you the ability to join with the power and energy of the Universal Life Force and the Life Force of this planet. This power and energy serve to multiply your own individual efforts. A talisman is, in a way, similar to a flashlight.
http://www.crystalvaults.com/pages/talismans.php


When I hear or read these "examples" this is what comes to mind.



The bible never speaks of her hair being for that.


It never gave examples of being used for that

[EA]

Originally Posted by Edward Anglin

I have been following this thread, and admit it amuses me.

Where has Bob been living?

He's like the guy whose wife has been cheating on him for years. His friends have told him over and over about her unfaithfulness, but he is so blinded by love that he just can't see the truth, and refuses to acknowledge that evidence of her adultery exists.

He refuses to believe them because he just loves her too much and still thinks of her purity on their wedding day. He's in love with a memory. That girl no longer exists.

Bob, welcome to the conversation.

This abominable doctrine has been preached for years. All of your AFF friends know this. Doctors Segraves and Bernard know this. You know this.

Stop defending it Bob and start demanding answers.

Somebody's been unfaithful.

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.

Bob, your friends are trying to help you.

[BobDylan]

Originally Posted by Edward Anglin

Bob, your friends are trying to help you.

Thanks Ed!