I have and like one LS's sermons-- it's an older one called, "Failures".
It's a very encouraging and biblically grounded sermon.
Since I like LS, I am thinking that you guys are taking his stance on HMH out of context.
He does not think or preach about power in the hair. He preaches about the power in the lives of women who practice the consecration of not cutting their hair.
At least, this is what I HOPE he is trying to persuade people of-- the value of a personal consecration in the life of a Christian.
If this is what in fact he is preaching and teaching, then you guys may be mischaracterizing his work and thus, be on very dangerous grounds in putting your mouths on one of God's Anointed.
If this is not what he is preaching, I really hope he can explain himself, biblically.
Going back to the God's Anointed, isn't there any fear in "uncovering the nakedness" of a man that God has clearly used and may indeed be using to spread the Gospel?
If LS is preaching some abominable false doctrine laced in the trappings of pentecostal legalism, then I am against that doctrine 100%
I am also against the man of God's credibility being ripped to shreds here-- without fear.
I wish he would come on here himself and attempt to defend the message that God has given him.
I wish that you guys would not make sport of this man of God.
If LS is wrong, then he is wrong-- but this can't be right either.
__________________
"The choices we make reveal the true nature of our character."
Well, I finally got another reply from SEU. Let me recap:
1. On 6/30, I sent this to their contact email: "Is there a directory of your faculty? I couldn't find one on your web site."
2. The next day, I got this response:
Sorry you have not given your name
Could you indicate what area and level of study you are interested in also your current qualification in order for me to assist you.
3. I replied the same day with my name and said "It's just curiosity. I won't be applying for admission."
4. After waiting for a reply for a few days, I sent a reminder on 7/3: "Could I see a list of your faculty, please?"
5. Got a reply to that, this morning. Are you ready? Are you sitting down? Put down the coffee. NOW, you better strap yourself to your chair. OK, here it is (don't say I didn't warn you):
I am sorry but your request does not make sense what do you want, if your next e-mail is as lacking in information it will be ignored
Dr John Johnson
. . .
6. My response to the above:
Quote:
Does your university have professors, instructors, lecturers, etc.? If so, I would like to see a list of their names. Thank you
Tim
7. His response:
Quote:
Tim
Your request is very strange as you have indicated that you do not wish to be a student of SEU. I am not prepared to divulge personal information on those who work with SEU but am prepared to indicate that most of the staff are part time, all have British qualifications in the areas they support and mark in and most hold or have held full time posts in the British education system. If you will indicate who you are and why you want the information I will reconsider.
Dr John Johnson
Well, that explains it. It's a privacy thing. Which is perfectly understandable.
__________________
Hebrews 13:23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty
Since I like LS, I am thinking that you guys are taking his stance on HMH out of context.'
But this is the problem, Jermyn....... because people like him, he's getting a pass on preaching this unbiblical doctrine all over the country.
Quote:
He does not think or preach about power in the hair. He preaches about the power in the lives of women who practice the consecration of not cutting their hair.
If he was only preaching power in consecration, there would be no need to focus so much on hair. He is unnecessarily and unnaturally focused on hair. There are many ways to consecrate yourself to God.
I have and like one LS's sermons-- it's an older one called, "Failures".
It's a very encouraging and biblically grounded sermon.
Since I like LS, I am thinking that you guys are taking his stance on HMH out of context.
He does not think or preach about power in the hair. He preaches about the power in the lives of women who practice the consecration of not cutting their hair.
At least, this is what I HOPE he is trying to persuade people of-- the value of a personal consecration in the life of a Christian.
If this is what in fact he is preaching and teaching, then you guys may be mischaracterizing his work and thus, be on very dangerous grounds in putting your mouths on one of God's Anointed.
If this is not what he is preaching, I really hope he can explain himself, biblically.
Going back to the God's Anointed, isn't there any fear in "uncovering the nakedness" of a man that God has clearly used and may indeed be using to spread the Gospel?
If LS is preaching some abominable false doctrine laced in the trappings of pentecostal legalism, then I am against that doctrine 100%
I am also against the man of God's credibility being ripped to shreds here-- without fear.
I wish he would come on here himself and attempt to defend the message that God has given him.
I wish that you guys would not make sport of this man of God.
If LS is wrong, then he is wrong-- but this can't be right either.
I hear and respect your pleas here, Jermyn. And it gives me pause for a moment to consider what is being said.
However, the OT concept of "touching the anointed" gets stretched way out of context by those who wish to ram-rod their way through the gullible who are willing to shell out big bucks to "feel good".
There is a big difference between those who have failed, come short, erred in some way, or handled something poorly, and those who are intentionally and deceitfully misrepresenting the truth in order to appear to be someone they're not.
Paul was RUTHLESS in pointing those out. He named them. He charged them. Why? Because he cared with all his heart for the most precious thing on earth....The Church.
True...Baron and DA aren't Paul. But they're clearly, in my opinion, doing something that Paul would never hesitate to do.
There are mean spirited people who just seek to destroy. I can VERY confidently say that none of those digging up facts here fall into that category.
If this is what in fact he is preaching and teaching, then you guys may be mischaracterizing his work and thus, be on very dangerous grounds in putting your mouths on one of God's Anointed.
Does anyone else get tired of preachers using the old "touch not mine anointed" as a pass for bad behaviour and lousy exegesis? If you are going to make public statements you need to be prepared to stand by them. If Stoneking gets "ripped to shreds" for his own words, he has no one to blame but himself.
Jermyn, I understand what you're saying. Generally speaking, I agree. This thread really isn't about LS's teachings. It's about the advertisement of a possibly illegitimate degree on the biography page of his website.
I don't personally want to be in the position of disrespecting any child of God. If that's how my comments have come across to you, then I apologize. However, there are legitimate questions here that should be answered, and when they aren't answered directly, or the answer is only to further obfuscate, it makes it look like the negative assumptions are pretty much true.
I just don't understand how a bogus "college" could issue honorary degrees at all (and what would be their motivation to do so if they're just about issuing paper in exchange for funds?). How on earth they would come up with Lee Stoneking's name in the mix in the first place? Either way, let's assume it's TRUE that he received an honorary (and free) degree from SEU. Since it's a bogus university, he shouldn't want to be associated with them, let alone be their "Adjunct Professor."
__________________
"God, send me anywhere, only go with me. Lay any burden on me, only sustain me. And sever any tie in my heart except the tie that binds my heart to Yours."
--David Livingstone
"To see no being, not God’s or any, but you also go thither,
To see no possession but you may possess it—enjoying all without labor or purchase—
abstracting the feast, yet not abstracting one particle of it;…."
--Walt Whitman, Leaves of Grass, Song of the Open Road
But this is the problem, Jermyn....... because people like him, he's getting a pass on preaching this unbiblical doctrine all over the country.
Then someone of AUTHORITY within our fellowship (or maybe even outside of our fellowship) needs to help him see the error of his ways. Making sport of him is not the way to do it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace*
If he was only preaching power in consecration, there would be no need to focus so much on hair. He is unnecessarily and unnaturally focused on hair. There are many ways to consecrate yourself to God.
I agree that there are many ways to consecrate ourselves. Still, the uncut hair is a way for Christian women to consecrate themselves.
Is he presenting this as heaven or hell?
Is presenting this as a "sure-fire" way to ensure the blessings of God in every natural circumstance?
Are his presentations a springboard for other spiritual abuses that seem to permeate some of the churches of our fellowship?
Even if the answer was, "YES" to each and everyone of the questions above, this thread is NOT the way to handle him and his false doctrine.
If the answer is YES to my above questions, WE HAVE AN ISSUE OF LEADERSHIP FAILURE WITHIN OUR FELLOWSHIP which needs to be addressed ASAP for sake of the souls that this organanization ministers to.
HEY UPCI LEADERSHIP GUYS!!!! ARE YOU READING THIS???? WHY DON'T YOU GUYS DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS-- IF INDEED HE IS OUT OF ORDER!!!!
No man of God's credibility should be publicly ripped to shreds.
__________________
"The choices we make reveal the true nature of our character."
Linear Mode
