Charismatic Sweep

[diakonos]

Originally Posted by consapente89

In other words...we don’t always know when it is, but many times, we know when it isn’t!

What?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Truthseeker

Cut hair is not the same as shorn or shaven though.

Shorn literally means cut, like "cropped". Most people can grasp what it means for a woman to be shorn, it implies her long beautiful hair is chopped off. That is what the Bible says should be done to a woman who refuses to be covered while praying.

I think only oneness pentecostals split hairs on "well exactly how much is to be cut off to qualify as cut?"

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by consapente89

It’s scriptural. Man looks on the outward appearance and God looks on the heart. We can’t see the heart (except by some sort of divine revelation) so we see someone that dresses in a fashion that God would be pleased with and we say “oh they must be holiness”. When in fact only God really knows if they are holiness or not. We DO know that the ladies cutting they’re hair aren’t holiness. We DO know that the men wearing skirts and the women wearing pants are not holiness. We do know that the men and women with earrings, makeup, wedding bands and such are not holiness. What we don’t really know is if that godly looking lady with her uncut hair, shame facedness and modest attire is really holiness or not, but God does. We don’t know for sure if that man with a godly looking hair cut and nice long sleeved shirt is really holiness or not, but God does!

The problem is most of the things you listed as indicators of possible holiness are debateable, and have been debated, by sincere people on both sides.

As for a "godly looking haircut" the only hairstyle the Bible remotely indicates is godly is the uncut hair of a man under a Nazarite vow. So there's that.

[consapente89]

Originally Posted by Esaias

The problem is most of the things you listed as indicators of possible holiness are debateable, and have been debated, by sincere people on both sides.

As for a "godly looking haircut" the only hairstyle the Bible remotely indicates is godly is the uncut hair of a man under a Nazarite vow. So there's that.

Debatable because people debate about them...sure. People debate the essentialist of water and spirit also. Doesn’t make it less true.

Short hair on men is the biblical hair style.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by consapente89

Debatable because people debate about them...sure. People debate the essentialist of water and spirit also. Doesn’t make it less true.

Short hair on men is the biblical hair style.

What I was saying is the specific items you listed are debated by sincere believers because there are no verses that say anything about for example sleeve length. Somebody debating against water baptism for example is not being sincere, because they are arguing against the direct and explicit statements of Scripture, and not merely against an opinion derived from principles mediated by culture with no explicit passages addressing the particular issue in the argued context.

Holiness is way more than clothing styles or an approved innocent amusements list. As long as people continue to immediately think holiness=dress standards it will be needful to emphasise that holiness=entire sanctification of the whole person and all areas of the whole life dedicated to Christ. That means how you live, vote, manage your finances, everything.

[KeptByTheWord]

Originally Posted by Esaias

What I was saying is the specific items you listed are debated by sincere believers because there are no verses that say anything about for example sleeve length. Somebody debating against water baptism for example is not being sincere, because they are arguing against the direct and explicit statements of Scripture, and not merely against an opinion derived from principles mediated by culture with no explicit passages addressing the particular issue in the argued context.

Holiness is way more than clothing styles or an approved innocent amusements list. As long as people continue to immediately think holiness=dress standards it will be needful to emphasise that holiness=entire sanctification of the whole person and all areas of the whole life dedicated to Christ. That means how you live, vote, manage your finances, everything.

Excellent.

Holiness is always a matter of the heart. It's much easier to preach a dress code than to clean up the inside of the heart.

Jesus preached to the Pharisees who were impeccably dressed, and yet, it was always about their heart condition that He spoke to. When did Jesus ever condemn anyone for their outward dress and appearance?

Holiness should be directed to heart issues, which is what Jesus did, yet it always seems to make its way around to outward appearance, every time.

[Amanah]

I think outward conformity creates a sense of unity in the same way that following some of the obscure commandments in leviticus cemented Jews into a community. Leviticus strongly rejected non conformity by rejecting even things in nature that were outside of categories.

But the end result is a sense of community devoid of the weightier matters of love and justice and genuine religion if outward conformity is the main emphasis

[consapente89]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Holiness is way more than clothing styles or an approved innocent amusements list. As long as people continue to immediately think holiness=dress standards it will be needful to emphasise that holiness=entire sanctification of the whole person and all areas of the whole life dedicated to Christ. That means how you live, vote, manage your finances, everything.

Absolutely agreed!

[Bro Flame]

Originally Posted by diakonos

This thread has a video of a message by an Assembly.. Assemblies... of God pastor. You may find it interesting.

http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...ght=Clendennen

I listened to this message last night. I don't believe I've ever heard any of Bro Clendennen's messages before, but this one was very good and very needed at present.

I'm entirely sure how old this particularly message is, but it is something the Pentecostal church, in general, has needed to hear for quite some time. It's a word we need to grab a hold of and embrace. We've welcomed a counterfeit spirit into our churches, which has mocked the genuine move of God for many years.

It really hit me when he said: "We didn't change the horse. It changed us, and we called it revival." Ouch. Wake up church! Just because someone is talking in tongues, to use Bro Clendennen's term, doesn't mean they have the Holy Ghost. Their fruit and lifestyle will speak for the genuineness of being Spirit-filled. Just give it time.

I know he was primarily speaking to Assemblies of God churches (he does mention the Church of God, the Pentecostal Church of God, and others), but I cannot help but think of our Apostolic brothers and sisters who are leaving this marvelous Truth by the droves. It makes my heart weary to think of these people that know better, but have settled for compromise.

Lord Jesus help us all.

[Bro Flame]

Genuine holiness involves both inward and outward applications. An inward change generally occurs first, and then those inward changes cannot help but represent themselves on one's outward appearance.

Both inward and outward holiness can be traced to Scripture.

The issue is, just as some have already said, most people stress either inward without the outward, or vice versa. The two go hand-in-hand. I remember someone here on AFF saying that if both inner and outer holiness are one-in-the-same (or you cannot have one without the other) then people need to stop speaking of them as if they're two different components. I totally agree. Almost every one of us here would agree that both inner and outer holiness make up Biblical holiness, so let's stop differentiating them.

That's cleared up.

But, like I said, the issue is a lot of churches stress outward standards. Now, I'll be the first to agree that outward convictions, expectations, restrictions, or "standards" are necessary and needed in a maturing Christian's walk with God. Of course, we could get technical and literal and therefore debate that some outward standards are not clearly stated in the Word. Naturally, those are the ones that bring up discussions that evolve into arguments over what is and isn't sin and whether or not someone is holy because they may not follow a conviction as strictly as the next one.

On the flip side, there are just as many churches (if not more) that only stress the importance of inner cleansing and applications of holiness. As we've said, it starts there, but it does not end there. Many of the churches I've encountered that preach just the necessity of inner transformation generally speak against some outward representations of Christian living in some capacity. My mother use to go to a church where the attitude was basically this: "I shouldn't be able to look a someone and tell they're a Christian by the way they're dressed." This theology came from the First Lady of this congregation, a woman whose mother had started said church, and brought her family up in the strict holiness way. These people have rejected the foundation as it was taught to them, and instead proclaim new revelations and scriptural understanding to justify their ever-changing views on the Christian lifestyle.

It's sad, but it's becoming the norm in some churches.

Issues like this have the Apostolic church in a mess. It's started among ourselves pretty much, too. We've raised up people through the generations that don't genuinely have a love for holiness or understand its necessity in their hearts, and that's why so many churches are leaving it. They're quite simply broadening a road Jesus says is narrow, and it just doesn't work that way. And I know that many people say that some "standards" (whether based on attire or lifestyle in general) can be written off or discarded as traditional and therefore presently unnecessary, but such standards and expectations were taught by our elders for a reason. They obviously felt God expected it from His Church for one reason or another, and if it's making us closer to Jesus, then why change it? When in doubt, always take the holier route. It won't hurt any of us when done correctly and in the compassionate spirit Christ wishes for us to assert.

I could go on and tell you of at least six different churches my Pastors once enjoyed a healthy fellowship with, but quite simply can no longer do so because these other churches are sliding away from the Truth they once taught. I know people in all of these churches, and while some will agree that their churches have changed, and not necessarily for the better, the majority of them see not a single error in the route their churches are progressively taking. It's an issue of the attitude these people are possessing these days. There's no urgency to maintain doctrinal convictions or landmarks.

I'll get off my soap box now. I've given all of you way more than any of you asked for.