What logic and Bible is used against beards?

[Tithesmeister]

Originally Posted by Apostolic1ness

[/B]

I agree with most of what your saying and really agreed with your second paragraph. However surely we shouldn't worship man but to say that people should not follow their Pastor's guidance or leadership is not right. Paul said "be ye followers of me, even as I also follow Christ". Leadership was given to the church to perfect the church. Do you not believe in Leadership in the Church?

I do believe in leadership in the church. I don't believe in authoritarian leadership in the church. There is too much scripture that invalidates it. Mainly this one . . .

1Cor.11
[3] But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

By the authority of what scripture do we shoe-horn the pastor between the husband and the wife, or between every man and his Savior?

I believe that the headship of Christ is threatened when we acknowledge that the pastor is the head of our church. The pastor being head of the church is not found anywhere in scripture. I do believe that pastors (notice the s) are given to the church for the perfecting of the saints (along with apostles, prophets, evangelists, and teachers, by the way, we seem to have elevated pastors above all others). I do believe pastors as a rule are sceptical of the ability of saints to follow the leading of the Holy Ghost, when they should be encouraging it. It results in saints that are encouraged to be overly dependent upon pastors and under dependent on seeking the leadership of the Holy Ghost, in my opinion.

Example: A young couple, who were evangelizing at the time and of which he has since become a pastor were instructing a group at our church. I was in the group. When she spoke, she began by saying that we should NOT be bothering our pastor with every little detail of our life. We shouldn't be going to him about every little thing. I was in agreement!

THEN she defined the things that we should be going to him about. If we bought a house or a car, she said, we should definitely consult our pastor before doing so. I guess the little things are a matter of perspective. I have NEVER consulted a pastor about buying either a house or a car. I have no reason to believe that his advice would be any more qualified than my own opinion, or of others that I may seek advice in that regard. I do see value in seeking the advice of elders in the church whom I respect, however, a pastor is not necessarily where I think I should go, not that he is automatically excluded from being able to give sound advice about real estate or cars. I just don't believe he has a God given ability to advise secular matters based on his filling the office of the pastor.

I believe that when we seek the counsel of the Holy Ghost, we become stronger Christians, we become better at seeking and following the Spirit. When we seek the counsel of the pastor, we should pray and seek the leading of the Holy Ghost about whether to follow his counsel. As you quoted about Paul. he said follow me as I follow Christ. What he didn't say is simply follow me because I'm the man o God. This scripture implies that we have the responsibility to evaluate whether Paul, or perhaps our pastor, is truly following Christ.

Along these lines, I have seen pastors give their blessing on marriages, some of which I had serious misgivings about. Many of these marriages have failed horribly. Is he accountable for this?

[Apostolic1ness]

Originally Posted by Tithesmeister

I do believe in leadership in the church. I don't believe in authoritarian leadership in the church. There is too much scripture that invalidates it. Mainly this one . . .

1Cor.11
[3] But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

By the authority of what scripture do we shoe-horn the pastor between the husband and the wife, or between every man and his Savior?

I believe that the headship of Christ is threatened when we acknowledge that the pastor is the head of our church. The pastor being head of the church is not found anywhere in scripture. I do believe that pastors (notice the s) are given to the church for the perfecting of the saints (along with apostles, prophets, evangelists, and teachers, by the way, we seem to have elevated pastors above all others). I do believe pastors as a rule are sceptical of the ability of saints to follow the leading of the Holy Ghost, when they should be encouraging it. It results in saints that are encouraged to be overly dependent upon pastors and under dependent on seeking the leadership of the Holy Ghost, in my opinion.

Example: A young couple, who were evangelizing at the time and of which he has since become a pastor were instructing a group at our church. I was in the group. When she spoke, she began by saying that we should NOT be bothering our pastor with every little detail of our life. We shouldn't be going to him about every little thing. I was in agreement!

THEN she defined the things that we should be going to him about. If we bought a house or a car, she said, we should definitely consult our pastor before doing so. I guess the little things are a matter of perspective. I have NEVER consulted a pastor about buying either a house or a car. I have no reason to believe that his advice would be any more qualified than my own opinion, or of others that I may seek advice in that regard. I do see value in seeking the advice of elders in the church whom I respect, however, a pastor is not necessarily where I think I should go, not that he is automatically excluded from being able to give sound advice about real estate or cars. I just don't believe he has a God given ability to advise secular matters based on his filling the office of the pastor.

I believe that when we seek the counsel of the Holy Ghost, we become stronger Christians, we become better at seeking and following the Spirit. When we seek the counsel of the pastor, we should pray and seek the leading of the Holy Ghost about whether to follow his counsel. As you quoted about Paul. he said follow me as I follow Christ. What he didn't say is simply follow me because I'm the man o God. This scripture implies that we have the responsibility to evaluate whether Paul, or perhaps our pastor, is truly following Christ.

Along these lines, I have seen pastors give their blessing on marriages, some of which I had serious misgivings about. Many of these marriages have failed horribly. Is he accountable for this?

Nice I can agree with all stated. I have even heard one Pastor say that when People come to him for advice the first thing he asks is if they have prayed about it themselves, putting the responsibility of seeking God back on the saint, (which is much needed).

[Tithesmeister]

Originally Posted by Apostolic1ness

Nice I can agree with all stated. I have even heard one Pastor say that when People come to him for advice the first thing he asks is if they have prayed about it themselves, putting the responsibility of seeking God back on the saint, (which is much needed).

Brother, I wholeheartedly agree. I think sometimes that it is a lazy way out for the saints. Perhaps a way to shift the responsibility of decisions that should be theirs, squarely onto the shoulders of the poor pastor.

The pastor that you refer to certainly displayed wisdom. I think a lot of pastors get caught up in the idea that since the saints are looking to them for answers, it must be their obligation to provide them, when all too often they should provide the answer in the example you quoted above.

[1ofthechosen]

Originally Posted by Apostolic1ness

Nice I can agree with all stated. I have even heard one Pastor say that when People come to him for advice the first thing he asks is if they have prayed about it themselves, putting the responsibility of seeking God back on the saint, (which is much needed).

That's what my Pastor is going to ask you first also.

[Aaron Rust]

I read up to page 18 or 19 then Im out of time. I am ordained AoG, so there is that. But no biblical evidence plus the precedent of early Apostolics being bearded... doesn't this tell you that this issue is a tradition of man? - A phariseeical tradition... God looks at the outward appearance of man? Or does God look at the heart? IF it is an issue of pride should you not all become like the amish? What about buttons? are they not prideful? What about vehicles, is that not prideful? What about designer suits? Armani suits, What about Stafford from JC Pennies, which is more prideful? Should you wear wingtip shoes? or is that too prideful? The Amish are good about being different... But they are not reaching the Lost.... The scripture is our all sufficient rule for our faith and our conduct. If it ain't in the Bible...

[Evang.Benincasa]

How about owning Snap on tools is that prideful? Or owning a Proto Titanium Series Sealed Head Air Ratchet? How about a complete set of Fluke test equipment? How about a Snap On, or MAC tool boxes? Another thing, who cares about Amish. They are smoked with "traditions of men" called Bundling, also known as Bed Courtship. So, Mr Ordained AoG minister, are you telling us that your organization doesn't have any traditions of men?

[Aaron Rust]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

How about owning Snap on tools is that prideful? Or owning a Proto Titanium Series Sealed Head Air Ratchet? How about a complete set of Fluke test equipment? How about a Snap On, or MAC tool boxes? Another thing, who cares about Amish. They are smoked with "traditions of men" called Bundling, also known as Bed Courtship. So, Mr Ordained AoG minister, are you telling us that your organization doesn't have any traditions of men?

no, we got as many as anybody... it's far far from perfect!... and Paul went by Paul to the Roman world and Saul to the Jewish world... that he may win some. he probably shaved when he went to the mission field. The gospel must come before our traditions.

ps i was taught that Sauls name was changed to Paul... I think a better view is the one above. Paul was his roman name.

[Michael The Disciple]

I read up to page 18 or 19 then Im out of time. I am ordained AoG, so there is that. But no biblical evidence plus the precedent of early Apostolics being bearded... doesn't this tell you that this issue is a tradition of man? - A phariseeical tradition...

Yes it is a tradition of men. It is a bad stumbling block to souls seeking Oneness truth. I oppose it fully.

Last week I was watching the livestream from Parkway Apostolic Church in Oak Creek Wisconsin. They had 5 men on the platform with beards and another one who gave the announcements.

So there were as many men on the platform at least with beards...as without!

A good sign.

[Scott Pitta]

If being clean shaven was important to early Pentecost, their images do not show it. Lots of facial hair from Azusa Street on.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Aaron Rust

no, we got as many as anybody... it's far far from perfect!...

OK, so with beam firmly planted in eye be on thou way.

Originally Posted by Aaron Rust

and Paul went by Paul to the Roman world and Saul to the Jewish world... that he may win some. he probably shaved when he went to the mission field. The gospel must come before our traditions.

That sounds like you have two different Gospel? Or Paul was ecclesiastically schizophrenic? Only one Gospel, which would make for only one truth. The AoG can't be right and the UPCI be right at the same time. Only one or none can have the message of salvation. The problem with religion is that logic is often sacrificed for whatever religious team you are in. So if you are a cardholder in the AoG you must hold the party line, and visa versa. Trinitarian and One God Pentecostals depart from each other in their views.Again both cannot be correct since they don't agree. One thinks Jesus is a god, while the other believes Jesus is the God. big difference. Therefore the AoG minister from Namibia would like to be more Pentecostal to blend with the Apostolic One God Pentecostals. Yet, the One God Pentecostals still believe that a person must be speaking in tongues when they receive the Holy Ghost ( tongues being indicator of having HG) and water baptism a must (in the name of Jesus being spoken out loud over neophyte) Again, this separates the two groups even in Pentecostal circles. Pentecostals who now believe that you can accept Jesus as personal savior and hold salvation..

Originally Posted by Aaron Rust

ps i was taught that Sauls name was changed to Paul... I think a better view is the one above. Paul was his roman name.

The name is Sha'ūl Paũlus, first name Hebrew the latter Latinized Greek. During the First Century A.D. In Hellenized Jerusalem it was typical for Diaspora and other Judeans of Freeborn Roman citizenry to have a Aramaic name and their Latin Roman name.