Trying to Rescue Another from HMH Doctrine

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by AreYouReady?

I mean no harm to you Aquila, but Bro. Epley inserted himself into this conversation by insinuating he knows what God hears and what God does not hear. I would like to hear what scriptures Brother Epley has to be able to make such claims in addition to and to support his claims in the scriptures contained in I Corinthians 11.

Out of the mouth of two or three witnesses...

Bro. Eply's position isn't biblical.

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by bbyrd009

I mean, how hard is that? Where does hair come in here?
And don't imagine that if you are so deluded about
a simple thing like hair, or pants, that you can tell
anyone about Christ. Thank God that at least
your churches are dying in droves.

Hair is a simple issue? Simple to who, you? What is simple is the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus being the finished work of salvation. The hair issue in OP churches is a convoluted, complex and intricate rule that is foisted upon women to make life very difficult and frustrating. The countless ours of haircare and dealing with split ends and working on intricate hairstyles and putting it up and dealing with all that hair on hot, humid days and dealing with hair loss and hair that doesn't grow luxurious and long etc.

The pants issue is simple? Really? Women having to always wear dresses in every condition and circumstance is easy? Women trying to play sports in a skirt, water ski in a skirt, do yard work in a skirt, horseback ride, snow ski, hike, jog, play volleyball in a skirt is simple? How about on bitterly cold days? It's so simple for women to have to find ways to keep their legs warm and comfortable some other way than to wear long johns and jeans or thermal pants or some other less complicated way? Really?

I'm gonna run the risk of being wrong here, but, are you male or female? If I was a betting man I'd guess male. But I could be wrong, and it could be that you really believe all of these rules about hair and clothing is the way to a simple life. But from my observation having grown up with three sisters and a mother, OP standards and the culture that works very hard to preserve them was much more difficult for the females in my life than the simple truth that Jesus loves women for what He finds in their heart rather than for what wear or don't wear, what they do or don't do with their hair.

Grace is simple. Legalism? Not so much.

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by AreYouReady?

I mean no harm to you Aquila, but Bro. Epley inserted himself into this conversation by insinuating he knows what God hears and what God does not hear. I would like to hear what scriptures Brother Epley has to be able to make such claims in addition to and to support his claims in the scriptures contained in I Corinthians 11.

Out of the mouth of two or three witnesses...

There's a convincing-sounding argument using Greek to say the verbs in I Cor. 11 mean to never cut hair. Now, there aren't any real credible Greek scholars anywhere in church history or even in contemporary times that would agree with the conclusions based on the Greek, but that doesn't matter. And even more importantly there is no other supportive passages outside of I Cor. 11 that even hint that women never cutting their hair was/is a New Testament doctrine or a prerequisite for heaven. But that doesn't matter either. What matters is the preservation of the sacred cow, the Apostolic Identity subculture, the acceptance among preacher friends and colleagues as well as family, invitations to preach the camps and the conferences and remaining in the good graces of the organization, denomination, network, etc.

[Michael Phelps]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

Hair is a simple issue? Simple to who, you? What is simple is the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus being the finished work of salvation. The hair issue in OP churches is a convoluted, complex and intricate rule that is foisted upon women to make life very difficult and frustrating. The countless ours of haircare and dealing with split ends and working on intricate hairstyles and putting it up and dealing with all that hair on hot, humid days and dealing with hair loss and hair that doesn't grow luxurious and long etc.

The pants issue is simple? Really? Women having to always wear dresses in every condition and circumstance is easy? Women trying to play sports in a skirt, water ski in a skirt, do yard work in a skirt, horseback ride, snow ski, hike, jog, play volleyball in a skirt is simple? How about on bitterly cold days? It's so simple for women to have to find ways to keep their legs warm and comfortable some other way than to wear long johns and jeans or thermal pants or some other less complicated way? Really?

I'm gonna run the risk of being wrong here, but, are you male or female? If I was a betting man I'd guess male. But I could be wrong, and it could be that you really believe all of these rules about hair and clothing is the way to a simple life. But from my observation having grown up with three sisters and a mother, OP standards and the culture that works very hard to preserve them was much more difficult for the females in my life than the simple truth that Jesus loves women for what He finds in their heart rather than for what wear or don't wear, what they do or don't do with their hair.

Grace is simple. Legalism? Not so much.

Byrd has a very tough time articulating his thoughts in a readable manner (jk Byrd, kind of), but I think he's in agreement with you here.

I believe his tirade was directed to the "Epley" disciples......

[TGBTG]

Originally Posted by Michael Phelps

Byrd has a very tough time articulating his thoughts in a readable manner (jk Byrd, kind of), but I think he's in agreement with you here.

I believe his tirade was directed to the "Epley" disciples......

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by AreYouReady?

Elder Epley has a kind face and it seems inconceivable to me that someone with such a kind face would make such bold statements as to what God hears or does not hear someone's prayers without presenting unrefutable scriptures from several sources in the Bible about those who will not inherit the Kingdom of God.

In these scriptures below I see nothing about women who cut their hair.

I Cor 6:9-10
Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

Galatians 5:19-21
19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

Revelation 21:8
But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

Galatians 2:17-21 (NKJV)

17..“But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is Christ therefore a minister of sin? Certainly not! 18..For if I build again those things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor. 19..For I through the law died to the law that I might live to God. 20..I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me. 21..I do not set aside the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain.”

New Living Translation:

17..But suppose we seek to be made right with God through faith in Christ and then we are found guilty because we have abandoned the law. Would that mean Christ has led us into sin? Absolutely not! 18..Rather, I am a sinner if I rebuild the old system of law I already tore down. 19..For when I tried to keep the law, it condemned me. So I died to the law—I stopped trying to meet all its requirements—so that I might live for God. 20..My old self has been crucified with Christ.[e] It is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me. So I live in this earthly body by trusting in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. 21..I do not treat the grace of God as meaningless. For if keeping the law could make us right with God, then there was no need for Christ to die.


JB Phillips Translation:

Now if, as we seek the real truth about justification, we find we are as much sinners as the Gentiles, does that mean that Christ makes us sinners? Of course not! But if I attempt to build again the whole structure of justification by the Law then I do, in earnest, make myself a sinner. For under the Law I “died”, and now I am dead to the Law’s demands so that I may live for God. As far as the Law is concerned I may consider that I died on the cross with Christ. And my present life is not that of the old “I”, but the living Christ within me. The bodily life I now live, I live believing in the Son of God, who loved me and sacrificed himself for me. Consequently I refuse to stultify the grace of God by reverting to the Law. For if righteousness were possible under the Law then Christ died for nothing!

English Standard Version:

17..But if, in our endeavor to be justified in Christ, we too were found to be sinners, is Christ then a servant of sin? Certainly not! 18..For if I rebuild what I tore down, I prove myself to be a transgressor. 19..For through the law I died to the law, so that I might live to God. 20..I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. 21..I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness[c] were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose.

The Message:

..17-18Have some of you noticed that we are not yet perfect? (No great surprise, right?) And are you ready to make the accusation that since people like me, who go through Christ in order to get things right with God, aren't perfectly virtuous, Christ must therefore be an accessory to sin? The accusation is frivolous. If I was "trying to be good," I would be rebuilding the same old barn that I tore down. I would be acting as a charlatan.

..19-21What actually took place is this: I tried keeping rules and working my head off to please God, and it didn't work. So I quit being a "law man" so that I could be God's man. Christ's life showed me how, and enabled me to do it. I identified myself completely with him. Indeed, I have been crucified with Christ. My ego is no longer central. It is no longer important that I appear righteous before you or have your good opinion, and I am no longer driven to impress God. Christ lives in me. The life you see me living is not "mine," but it is lived by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. I am not going to go back on that.

......Is it not clear to you that to go back to that old rule-keeping, peer-pleasing religion would be an abandonment of everything personal and free in my relationship with God? I refuse to do that, to repudiate God's grace. If a living relationship with God could come by rule-keeping, then Christ died unnecessarily.

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by Michael Phelps

Byrd has a very tough time articulating his thoughts in a readable manner (jk Byrd, kind of), but I think he's in agreement with you here.

I believe his tirade was directed to the "Epley" disciples......

Well, that's no fun...

[Michael Phelps]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

Well, that's no fun...

Yeah, I know, it took me a while to figure him out! I went round and round with him a couple of times before I figured out we were saying the same thing!

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Bro. Eply is conformed into the image of "old time Pentecost". And I seriously doubt anyone here will change his mind. We must leave Bro. Eply be and seek to be conformed into the very image of Jesus Himself.

"old time Pentecost" was not all "outward holiness." The folks upon whom the Holy Spirit fell in the late 1800's and early 1900's were made up of different people. Some were "strict" performance based folks (clothes line and rule preachers) and others were not. Bro. Goss was a leader of "old time Pentecost" or "Apostolic" and those with whom he was associated were not "clothes line holiness" folks. Ref the familiar quote from the biography of Bro. Goss by his wife, Ethel Goss.

On page 69 of the book she talks about the way they dressed which is in marked contrast to the way some of the preachers preach about standards, clothing, jewelry, etc today. Years ago we used to refer to this as "clothes line preaching." Now I guess it's just considered preaching on standards.

"We did not wear uniforms. The lady workers dressed in the current fashions of the day, ...silks...satins...jewels or whatever they happened to possess. They were very smartly turned out, so that they made an impressive appearance on the streets where a large part of our work was conducted in the early years.

"It was not until long after, when former Holiness preachers had become part of us, that strict plainness of dress began to be taught.

"Although Entire Sanctification was preached at the beginning of the Movement, it was from a Wesleyan viewpoint, and had in it very little of the later Holiness Movement characteristics. Nothing was ever said about apparel, for everyone was so taken up with the Lord that mode of dress seemingly never occurred to any of us."

[Sam]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

Hair is a simple issue? Simple to who, you? What is simple is the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus being the finished work of salvation. The hair issue in OP churches is a convoluted, complex and intricate rule that is foisted upon women to make life very difficult and frustrating. The countless ours of haircare and dealing with split ends and working on intricate hairstyles and putting it up and dealing with all that hair on hot, humid days and dealing with hair loss and hair that doesn't grow luxurious and long etc. ...

Having been a member of three UPC churches, being related by marriage to people in UPC churches, and being around and associated with people in UPC churches for over a period of half a century, it is my observation that most of the ladies keep their hair short enough to manage and long enough to fix in a "Pentecostal hair style." At least that seems to be the norm from what I've observed. Things may be different in other parts of the country but that's based on what I've seen in Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Ohio (mostly Ohio). Of course the PAW folks have no problem with women's hair, facial hair for men, and in some cases jewelry and makeup here.