The Apostolic Pentecostal Experience came to Jamaica in 1918
According to Dr C.A Holdsworth the Oneness movement arrived in Jamaica in 1918, when a female missionary Sappelton visited from the USA meeting with a Baptist Deacon named Bro. H. Lee. Following the ministry of this female carrier of the good news bro Lee accepted the Acts 2:38 message and was baptised in Jesus’ name and filled with the Holy Ghost.
Between 1918 and 1919 Bro. Lee responded to the call to ministry and was ordained an Elder. Elder Lee met with a white English brother named Elder Arthur Watson, this dynamic duo worked to spread the wonderful truth of the Mighty God in Jesus and Baptism in Jesus’ name across Jamaica. Dr Holdsworth notes that the message “spread rapidly”. One of the first churches to be established was pioneered by Elder Lee and located in Brown’s Town, St Ann. The church still exists today, under the name Apostolic Ark (pastored by Bishop G.W. Johnson).
Dr Holdsworth’s history of the church in Jamaica continues with Elders Lee and Watson working with a “light skinned woman” J.R. Russell (nee Pryce) and her helper Melvina Needham (an early convert of the revival). I am not sure of the detail, but it appears that White and Russell play a key role in the establishment of a United Pentecostal Church (UPC) in Jamaica.
According to Bishop Holdsworth…
She [Sis Melvina Needham] later met and married George White. White started a church in Caris-Brook, St. Elizabeth. His work in evangelism in Jamaica along with Mother White has had tremendous effects. Later, Mother Russell was baptised in Jesus name. After much controversy in 1947 she invited Pastor V. Reynolds and his wife to Kingston to establish a branch of the United Pentecostal Church U.P.C. at Wildman Street. The Church expanded rapidly thereafter.
According to the Jamaica Gleaner, the church founded by Mother White (Evangelist Mulvina White) was The Emmanuel Apostolic Church, established in 1923. Mother White died in 1969. Today Emanuel Apostolic has c. 43 churches across Jamaica and 3 in N. America. Mother White was succeeded by Bishop Silbert Uriah Thomas who served Emanuel as Presiding Bishop for 38 years, until Nov-2007 when his son Everton Thomas was installed as Presiding Bishop of Emanuel (Bishop Thomas Snr was 82 at the time).
Mother Christine Walsh Converted
It was under the ministry of Bishop and Mother White that Mother Christine Walsh was baptised in Jesus name at Port Maria. Mother Walsh came to Jesus despite the strong opposition of her husband Charles Walsh who would later become a Bishop within the Apostolic Pentecostal Movement. His objection to Mother Walsh being saved was rooted in his being a Baptist Lay Minister, and the scorn that was associated with ‘the clap hand church’ in those days. Bishop Walsh founded Shiloh in 1942, see my post of the History and Precepts of the Shiloh church – as well as my Short Note on the History of Bethel which covers Mother White’s conversion.
Thanks to Bishop Holdsworth for writing about the this in p.21 of his book: Back to Basics: Handbook of Oneness Apostolic Pentecostal Teachings (Restoring the Foundations), Bishop C.A. Holdsworth M.Div. D.D.
According to Bishop C. A. Holdsworth (Back to Basics, Handbook of Oneness Apostolic Pentecostal Teachings, n.d.)
Posted by caron123 on May 31, 2008 at 10:27 pm
Please see “A Call for Discernment” by going to http://www.justinpeters.org. Justin is an evangelist and in addition to expository preaching, also holds seminars on the “Word of Faith” movement. He has cerebral palsy and concurs with the apostle Paul, “My grace is sufficient for thee.”
To God be the glory!
Caron
Los Angeles
Posted by jesusblogger on May 31, 2008 at 10:49 pm
Thanks for sharing the link. I do not endorse the Word of Faith Movement either, see my post: http://jesusblogger.wordpress.com/2008/02/07/moving-from-the-prophetic-to-the-pathetic/
Posted by Linda on June 4, 2008 at 6:31 pm
I am looking for a mail address or website for Elder Howard Marks, Pastor of Flagaman Apostolic Church St. Elizabeth Jamaica. May be a small work – can anyone confirm this church exists?
Posted by jesusblogger on June 4, 2008 at 8:12 pm
PTL sis Linda, I haven’t heard of that church.
Posted by fabian fletcher on July 5, 2008 at 12:40 am
how can i aquire one of the Back to Basics, Handbook of Oneness Apostolic Pentecostal Teachings
Posted by Sis Annette on July 9, 2008 at 12:01 pm
Bishop Holdsworth when r u returning to London in particular, Beulah, Willesden?
I need this book: Back to Basics: Handbook of Oneness Apostolic Pentecostal Teachings (Restoring the Foundations), Bishop C.A. Holdsworth M.Div. D.D.
Posted by Sis Annette on July 9, 2008 at 12:46 pm
Greetings in Jesus Name Bishop, there is a great need for teaching on the back to basics,foundation of the Apostolic faith/teachings. I have many friends in the tri-faith belief and I believe this book will help both them and me immensely.
Bless you in Jesus’name.
Posted by jesusblogger on July 9, 2008 at 11:19 pm
God bless you sis Annette, I am not Bishop Holdsworth, I just quoted some of the info in my article from his book.
Posted by britney falconer on August 8, 2008 at 7:25 pm
That church does exist as a matter of fact my whole family goes to that church and it’s like 2 minutes from my house .Sorry to say but i don’t have a mailing address for him..
Posted by Benjamin Amanze on September 12, 2008 at 1:39 pm
Thanks be to God for oneness Churches all over the world.
Iam a oneness preacher from Nigeria.I will like to know more about this great ministery.God blss
Benjamin Amanze
Posted by B.o.B. on September 23, 2008 at 1:32 am
Apostle GW Johnson from The Apostolic Ark in Browns Town Jamaicais is currently in Cricklewood (London NW2 6XG for your sat-nav), St Michael’s, preaching up a storm and baptising in Jesus name this week until Sunday 28th September 2008. He is truly being used by God. There is healing and deliverance and the prayer kerchief ministry is really having an impact… come and be blessed. All are welcome.
St Michael’s CJC – Where everybody is somebody and Jesus Christ is Lord
Posted by jesusblogger on September 23, 2008 at 1:37 am
Thank you for the invite.
Posted by C. Provost on September 25, 2008 at 5:43 pm
Hi. I’m in Toronto, working on a degree in education. In Jamaica, my mother’s mother was given to Aunt Nina Price Russell who raised her. In the next generation my mother was given to someone else in Aunt Nina’s family – my Grannie Maggie – who raised my mother. My uncle was given to Aunt Nina’s niece, another Aunt Nina. J.R. Russell, as we know it, was the elder Aunt Nina’s Price-Russell’s husband. In the family, we acknowledge the foreign connection by missionaries coming, however, we always say that Aunt Nina was the founder
Posted by Nicole on September 29, 2008 at 5:22 am
I could greatly appreciate if anyone could assist me with the number for any Apostolic church near or at New Market in St. Elizabeth
Posted by True Doctrine on October 29, 2008 at 9:51 pm
Prase Jesus, Can someone please help me!!!. I am looking for a church in florida. I have passed through some but I am not satisfied with the way they are operating. I need a doctrineised, Holy Ghost Filled santified Church. One like Bishop Johnson congregation from jamaica .One where the women dont perm their hair and they where hats on their heads. I need a church that lives up to the standards of “The CHURCH” and abides by the true foundation that has been laid. Please respond with an address and name of the church
Posted by Apostolic Child Of God on June 15, 2009 at 5:13 pm
For TRUE DOCTRINE
I believe Apostle Delroy Smith has a church somewhere in Florida where they have NATURAL HAIR etc.
He comes under a set of churches called Triumphant Ministries (they’re Apostolic). If you google him I’m sure you’ll come up with something.
God Bless
Posted by jesusblogger on November 1, 2008 at 4:29 pm
Praise Jesus ‘True Doctrine’. I don’t think you will find a church which meets all of your criteria within Florida. Perming hair is not a sin, neither is it forbidden in scripture. Although, I understand the culture in Jamaican churches which are v. orthodox do not allow it as it is perceived as being worldly.
I think you should seek a place of worship which holds to the Biblical standards of salvation and holiness.
I think a church you should seek is Bethel United Church in Fort Lauderdale, or in Kissimee (also may be called First United Church) both coming out of Bishop S A Dunn of England (formerly of Shiloh).
Posted by True Doctrine on November 2, 2008 at 4:55 pm
Prase Jesus Saints. I understand some Christians feel your hair will not save your soul. But this is not true. The scriptures say …
1 Corinthians 11:14
Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?
1 Corinthians 11:15
But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.
1 Timothy 2:9
In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with BROIDED HAIR, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;
1 Peter 3:3
Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of PLAITING THE HAIR, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;
…it was told long ago, 1 Corinthians 3:11 “For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ .” therefore we can not change it.
Jesus said in ” Matthew 16:18,19 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
God gave his prophets power to make rules for the church. The standard has been set long before perms were made but the bible coverd it to go with the change of time. Men and women should not braid their hair, have lox or gorw it long or change the colour or texture i.e (perms).
This is the way it is. if anyone thinks they are bad enough to change it good luck for the bible does not even speak of the punishment for those who preach false doctrine.
Revelation 20:14 – to the end says.
And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb’s book of life. Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book. Then saith he unto me, See thou do it not: for I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren the prophets, and of them which keep the sayings of this book: worship God. And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand. For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
Be smart OBEY GODS WORD.
Posted by jesusblogger on November 3, 2008 at 11:07 pm
@TRUE_DOCTRINE
For all the scriptures quoted none of the above prohibits a woman from having permed hair.
There was valid reason for women in Roman culture of the 1st Century not to have plaited hair (i.e. add gold) as it was synonymous with prostitution. The same is not true of perming hair.
Remember also that we are not under the Mosaic Law, but under the grace of God, through Jesus Christ.
Salvation is by faith and loving obedience. Not just adhering to a bunch of rules.
I believe in holiness too. I do not believe in many contrary things. But perm hair is no sin and you can not bring 1 scripture to prove it is. It is a man made law, nothing more.
Posted by sym_one on November 25, 2008 at 7:11 am
being a member of the Apostolic Ark Church i s the best thing that could ever happen to me. Apostle GW Johnson, Bishop Owen South are hearing from God. I love the undiluted and infallible word of God.
Posted by sym_one on November 25, 2008 at 7:13 am
Anybody looking a to Holy Ghost filled church to visit? 42 Knowles Road, Mandeville, Manchester, Jamaica WI is the place to be. A warm welcome awaits you.
Posted by True Doctrine on December 1, 2008 at 8:58 pm
Hey, What a small world. That is my home church. I was born and raised at that church as a young child. But I live in Florida now. Still looking for a good church if you know what i mean.
Bishop South is like a Grandfather to me. If anyone needs healing Knowles Road Is definately a “Micicle Temple”.
Posted by Bishop Lincoln A.Graham Sr on December 23, 2008 at 5:57 pm
My interest has always been in the “History Of Pentecostalism In Jamaica.” I am even more interested in the Apostolic movement,when it began,and by whom.There are only a few of the old timers who are still alive.The widows of some of them are yet alive.We must act quickly to gather as much information as possible about our Jamaican apostolic heritage.
I have just returned from the going home celebration of my pastor and mentor,Bishop D.A Gallimore.I was the featured speaker.Many apostolic organizations were represented by their bishops.Dr C.A.Holdsworth,Bishop Carmen Stewart,Bishop Johnson,and a host of others,including the leadership and the of the UPC of Jamaica and the ministerial brotherhood.
Thank you Dr Holdsworth for the encouraging information about “How Apostolic (Oneness) Pentecostalism Came to Jamaica.” I would like to have copy.Also,if anyone has any information about our history,please email me at Lincagram@yahoo.com.
Thank you.
Posted by nats on January 6, 2009 at 11:41 pm
hey saints of God.I just want to comment on wearing of hats. please am not saying that you must put down what you believe in but i am saying that you must pray to God for revelation about this. I too was baptise in Jesus name and grew up to believe that women should wear hats but it was more of a cultural understanding than that of a revelation….for so was i taught. Any way i went to a church in that believed and thought the same Jesus name doctrine and i felt that i should wear my hat but to my amazement i was told that i didnt have to and scriptures was giving to clarify it. I felt so uncomfortable and confused and i kept praying to God for the revelation of it and i must say again i struggled because i wasnt willing to let my guard down. As times went by it became more clear that wearing a hat wasnt really necessary because the bible cannot lie and God is not the author of confusion. in 1cor 11:15 it saids that if a woman have long hair it is a glory to her for her hair is given her for a COVERING.Read on… but if any man seem to be CONTENTIOUS, we have no such CUSTOM, Neither the CHURCHES of God. Here we have our hair as a COVERING instead of a hat and we have God who is our COVERING also. when we divide ourself amongst ourselves we leave our self vulnerable to the adversary. lets get down to real studying of the scriptures about the hair and the covering what ever you want to call it. Its a doctrine that separates the saints of God because paul was talking about hair/man and womans’ and nothing to do with hats.
Look its not a big deal i still felt the anointing of God. I still pray for people. I was taught that i must put my hat on incase i have to pray for someone.ridiculous!! if i am on the street and someone need God will i say to them wait let me go home and get my hat first? do i have to wear my hat all day at home too? do i have to wear it at work for we are commanded to pray without ceasing. I love you all brothers and sisters in Christ but dont let lack of understanding and revelation from God keep us apart. If hat is a CULTURAL thing then why bring it into the CHURCH? those who are not cultural like you wont be able to come to your church either and you cant win souls like that you can only win your predominant culture. Then it is racist and partial and where there is fighting and wars God’s presence wont be there. Its high time for us to wake up i say wake up and smell the coffee. Can i add, the churches like the upci that doesnt wear hats i see them dressing more modestly and all they preached can be backed up scripturally.There are also more miracles happening and more seriousness there too.there values are strict and makes sense too for anyone seeking a new life. i hope i havent shattered your minds here cos i dont intent to but just want all of us to wake up to reality and what God place us here for if we are chosen by him. pray for revelation!!! i have learnt to be like the bereans in the bible i must open and seek out the things of God for myself and not just because you told me so. Always go home and read over what your pastor say to you. dont just say you believe and leave it there. Find truth for yourself. love you all we are all part of God’s body
Posted by jesusblogger on January 7, 2009 at 12:06 am
Nats,
Thank you for your comment. I am not going to bash you for what you believe. Some churches believe in hair being the covering and therefore do not cut their hair and God does indeed still bless these churches.
However, I should point out that the words within the King James version for ‘covering’ are not entirely clear. When you look up the Greek meaning you see that the word used in 1 Corinthians 11:4-5 and 1 Corinthians 11:10 are different.
In 1 Corinthians 11:4-5 which reads ‘every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head…’ the word for covered is ‘veiled’ as in a covering worn over the head – that is in addition to the hair (e.g. a hat, or scarf). In context this scripture was written to men who prayed to Greek God’s such as Diana and Aphrodite at Pagan temples where it was common for the men to cover their heads in prayer to these false gods. Paul was saying it should not be so in the church of God.
However, the order Paul gave was for the women to wear a veil in humility as an act of devotion to God (1 Cor. 11:5). Nature teaches that a woman’s hair is given to her as a glorious covering. However, in God’s presence no flesh is to glory. Therefore, the woman covers her glory in recognition of the awesomeness of God when praying and prophesying in a public worship service. Paul was dealing with order in the church meetings primarily.
To prove the point of the difference between the veil as a covering and the hair as a covering read 1 Corinthians 11:6 closely.
“For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn…”
If a woman had no covering, and covering was short or no hair, then being shorn would be pointless. But what the Apostle is saying here is that, if a sister comes into service without her head covered by hat or veil she may as well have her hair shaved off – i.e. it is a shame for her to do this thing before God. Therefore, because appearing in His presence bear head is a shame she should wear a veil and cover her glory in the presence of His majesty.
Hope this helps?
Posted by An Old Time Christian on January 9, 2009 at 8:31 pm
Hi All.
I saw the postings above and I hate to sound ignorant to your feelings. But this is the way it is cut and dry.
I have heard from Bishop Johnson, Bishop South of Apostolic Ark and Bishop Christie of Shiloh/ Triumphant, all of whom are Senior leaders in the Apostolic faith and have probably been saved a lot longer than any of you. They all agree that Apostolic Christians do not fashion themselves like sinners in the world. We consider ourselves to be royal priesthood and are to dress in modest apparel.
Women wear hats in church and men do not. We do not adjust the physical characteristics in which God has made us.(i.e., perms, dreads, weave, wigs, tight clothes, wearing pants really low and I can go on and on). Altering yourself equivalent to saying that how God made you was not good enough and you can do better. I don’t think God would like that.
The Bible can be interpreted any way you like to fit your lifestyle but I encourage you to seek the truth from righteous preachers. There are a lot of people out there preaching that God did not call.
If the service is always nice something is wrong. You must feel a conviction every time you go to service. If you don’t go somewhere that does.
Salvation was intended for man to reunite the relationship between man and God that was lost in the Garden of Eden. We must try to live the way God intended for Adam and Eve “Pure and Holy”
Any man that preaches false doctrine I rebuke you in the name of Jesus.
Posted by lulla on January 11, 2009 at 12:57 am
have anyone of you listen to the preaching of Lee stoneking on the Hair? well it is eye opening and i hope it makes you think. I have my beliefs on the topic and so have you. Please listen to his preaching on the Hair and i think you can get it on you-tube. jesus put in lee stoneking sermons and search his archives.
Do you believe that the Upci women are in error to Gods word? they dont wear hats or veil and they definitely have the Holyghost. I wish more people can comment on this. Because if this is going to keep people out of the kingdom of God i certainly wants to be in.
If it is a compulsory thing to do in church i hope that we have to wear it at home and at work and in the streets too. And does that mean i cannot come to your church and worship because i dont own or wear a hat. come on pastors i want to hear from more of you even if you are upc or not. This is very interesting
Posted by Power of Faith on January 11, 2009 at 6:41 am
Glory be to God ….
Posted by MONIQUE on January 29, 2009 at 10:05 am
uncovered hair means- cut hair check it out in the bible or go back to university. God’s word is a revelation and culturalism will keep us out of the kingdom.To obey is better than to sacrifice. There is nothing wrong with wearing your hats etc but the bible did not speak concerning that type of covering rather it spoke concerning headship which points to leadership and authority. Disobedience is like the sin of withcraft.
Posted by jesusblogger on January 30, 2009 at 12:22 pm
@Monique
You have given no scripture and no definition to support your OPINION. Bring the Word and people can listen to you.
….as I said in an earlier reply: -
However, I should point out that the words within the King James version for ‘covering’ are not entirely clear. When you look up the Greek meaning you see that the word used in 1 Corinthians 11:4-5 and 1 Corinthians 11:10 are different.
In 1 Corinthians 11:4-5 which reads ‘every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head…’ the word for covered is ‘veiled’ as in a covering worn over the head – that is in addition to the hair (e.g. a hat, or scarf). In context this scripture was written to men who prayed to Greek God’s such as Diana and Aphrodite at Pagan temples where it was common for the men to cover their heads in prayer to these false gods. Paul was saying it should not be so in the church of God.
However, the order Paul gave was for the women to wear a veil in humility as an act of devotion to God (1 Cor. 11:5). Nature teaches that a woman’s hair is given to her as a glorious covering. However, in God’s presence no flesh is to glory. Therefore, the woman covers her glory in recognition of the awesomeness of God when praying and prophesying in a public worship service. Paul was dealing with order in the church meetings primarily.
To prove the point of the difference between the veil as a covering and the hair as a covering read 1 Corinthians 11:6 closely.
“For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn…”
If a woman had no covering, and covering was short or no hair, then being shorn would be pointless. But what the Apostle is saying here is that, if a sister comes into service without her head covered by hat or veil she may as well have her hair shaved off – i.e. it is a shame for her to do this thing before God. Therefore, because appearing in His presence bear head is a shame she should wear a veil and cover her glory in the presence of His majesty.
Posted by MONIQUE on February 2, 2009 at 10:37 am
21
JulDavid Bernard Weighs In ….
Posted by Daniel Alicea
Here are my thoughts:
1. We are saved by grace through faith, not works. Our faith issues forth in obedience, so that as we walk by faith we will endeavor to obey God’s Word. God’s grace, which we receive through faith, is God’s work in us. He progressively transforms us so that we have the desire and power to do His will. Of course, we have the responsibility to let God’s work be manifest in our lives. (See Philippians 2:12-13; Titus 2:11-12; Hebrews 12:10, 14.)
2. We cannot earn favors from God through our works. Likewise, we are not exempt from the trials of life simply because we serve God. (See I Corinthians 10:13; I Peter 5:9.) At the same time, God does honor our faith in many ways, so that by our prayer of faith we can receive many miraculous answers, avoid many unnecessary temptations, and receive divine supply for many needs. (See Matthew 6:11-13; Philippians 4:19.)
3. Regarding hair, and specifically the reference to angels in I Corinthians 11:10, below is an excerpt from my book, In Search of Holiness, rev. ed. 2006.:
New Testament teaching – We now turn to the New Testament teaching on hair as found in I Corinthians 11:1-16. Most denominational churches ignore this passage, concluding that it does not apply today. Some interpret it to mean that women must pray with some type of cloth on their heads. Most conservative churches at one time taught women to have long hair, and some continue to do so today.
All Scripture is given by the inspiration of God (II Timothy 3:16). We should not ignore any passage of Scripture, for each is precious and important. We should especially heed instructions to the New Testament church, for we are part of that church. Let us analyze this passage of Scripture in that light.
Verses 1-2. Paul admonished believers to follow him and to keep the ordinances or teachings that he had delivered to them. Among these ordinances is his teaching concerning hair in the subsequent verses.
Verse 3. God is the head of Christ. As a human, Jesus submitted to the eternal Spirit of God that dwelt in Him, thereby setting an example for us. Christ subjected His flesh to the plan and purpose of God, even unto death (Philippians 2:8).
Similarly, Christ is the head of the man, and the man is the head of the woman. God intends for the man to be the leader of the family. He is to be the spiritual representative of the home. In the beginning, God held Adam primarily accountable for human sinfulness. The sins of fathers particularly affect children (Exodus 20:5). Moreover, a woman is to respect the leadership of her own husband (Ephesians 5:22; Colossians 3:18; I Peter 3:1).
Verse 4. A man should not have his head covered when he prays or prophesies. If he does, he dishonors his head or leader, namely, Christ. Prophesying includes any anointed preaching and testimony.
Verse 5. A woman who prays or prophesies (including preaching and testimony) with her head uncovered dishonors her head or leader, which is the man. In other words, the sexes should not try to change places. The woman’s covering is a sign of her role in God’s plan. According to verse 15, long hair is the symbolic covering that God has given her, and according to verse 6 it should be unshorn or uncut.
Verse 6. If a woman is not going to cover her head (by letting her hair grow long), then this is equivalent to cutting off her hair. But this is a disgrace or a shame to her. It signifies the taking away of her glory in God’s sight. Since it is a shame for her hair to be shorn (cut) or shaved, she should be covered (let her hair grow long).
Verses 7-9. Adam was created in the image of God and subsequently Eve was also (Genesis 1:26-27). The man is the representative of the family before God, with the authority and responsibility to provide for his family, protect his family, and lead his family spiritually. As a sign of his position, his head should not be covered (with long hair, verse 14). The woman originally came from the man (Genesis 2:22). She is his partner, a helper comparable to him (Genesis 2:20), who respects his position and follows his godly leadership. Woman is the crowning glory of man. To demonstrate this relationship, her head should be covered (verse 6) with her glory, which is her long hair (verse 15). In short, male and female are equally important in God’s plan, but their roles are distinct, and God wants this distinction to be displayed and preserved outwardly by their hair.
Verse 10. The angels are involved with this subject, as they observe the obedience or disobedience of humans to God’s plan. The angels desire to look into our salvation (I Peter 1:12). Pride and rebellion caused the fall of Satan and many angels (I Timothy 3:6; Isaiah 14:12-15). Thus, a woman should have “power” on her head on her head as an example to the angels. The Greek word here is exousia, meaning “authority,” and in this context it indicates a mark or sign of authority. The angels look to see if women have the sign of consecration, submission, and power with God, or if they are rebellious like Satan. Women’s hair shows the angels whether or not the church is submissive to Christ, the head of the church.
Verses 11-12. Women are not inferior to men, and men are not complete without women. Both depend on each other. This principle of complementarity and interdependence is especially true in the church. The roles are different, however, and God has designated the man to be the leader of the family.
Verse 13. Paul used a question as a part of his teaching method. Is it proper for a woman to pray to God uncovered? His answer is no; it is a shame for her to do so (verse 5).
Verse 14. Nature, not just custom, teaches a man to have short hair but a woman to have long hair. Since God is the Creator of nature, the teaching of nature in this situation comes from God. God’s purpose is to make a distinction of the sexes in this area.
Verse 15. A woman’s hair is given for her glory and for a covering to satisfy the requirements of the preceding verses. This verse does not mention any other covering such as a hat or scarf. It would be difficult for a woman to put on a scarf every time she prays or witnesses to someone, especially if she prays without ceasing (I Thessalonians 5:17). This verse explains that a woman does not have to wear a veil of cloth; her hair is sufficient covering.
The Greek word for “have long hair” here is koma¯o, which means “wear long hair, let one’s hair grow long”3 or “wear tresses of hair.”4 The word for “covered” in verse 6 is katakalupt¯o, meaning “to cover wholly, i.e., to veil.”5 The word for “covering” in verse 15 is peribolaion, which is “something thrown around one, i.e., a mantle, veil.”6 Thus, verses 5-6 teach that a woman’s head should be covered wholly or veiled. Verse 15 says her hair is a mantle or veil; it is a symbolic article of apparel for the head. Clearly, long hair is the covering that meets the requirements of verses 5, 6, and 13.
Verse 16. The people of God are not contentious. The church has no custom of being contentious over the teachings of God’s Word. It has no custom regarding hair other than what Paul had just described. Some say this verse means that if anyone disagrees with these teachings then obedience is not required. If this were true, however, then Paul’s entire teaching in this section would be in vain, and he would be condoning contention and disobedience. Paul would not say, “If you do not have such a custom, then you are not required to obey the Word of God and the ordinances of the church.” Reading verses 2 and 16 together, the message is that we should obey these teachings instead of being contentious.
———————————–
David Bernard’s, In Search of Holiness is available here
Posted by MONIQUE on February 2, 2009 at 11:25 am
The Long Hair Doctrine
In Defense of The Long Hair Doctrine
and
Evangelist Lee Stoneking and Ruth Rieder Harvey
Dr. G. Reckart
Copyright All Rights Reserved
Liberal Oneness Charismatic critics are complaining about the interpretation of “long hair” [1Cor 11:15] in Paul’s doctrine meaning uncut. In being contentious they claim long hair does not mean uncut. With this interpretation women can cut their hair any length they want. According to these, there is no salvation in a woman’s hair if it is uncut or cut. This theory is based upon salvation being by grace and no acts of obedience in faith. Therefore, since none of our faith saved us nothing we refuse to do by faith can damn us. Once a person accepts Jesus as their personal Savior they are under no obligation to any addition faith in obedience to doctrinal rules or standards of holiness or godliness.
This belief compounds its error by claiming a woman’s long hair absolutely does not give her any special standing with God. This means, any interpretation that “power” she has on her head because of long hair, is not a supernatural blessing those with short hair do not have. In fact, they teach the “power” a Sister might have because of long hair, has nothing to do with spiritual power at all, but rather means authority and this plays out to be her husband’s rule over her. In other words, the power upon her head is not given to her by God because of her long hair, it is the authority of her husband over her.
Well, the liberals, even if they are Oneness, are out to be change agents of a new church order. They are determined to alter the Apostolic doctrine of uncut hair on all females in the Church. They are attempting to form a new consensus among the Oneness ecumenicals against the long hair doctrine of Paul which main-stream Apostolics have always taught as uncut hair. They now want to redefine long hair and remove any spiritual power a Sister may have because she has honored her head and refuses to cut her hair.
There are many testimonies of Apostolic Sisters about the spiritual power they have experience upon them which they tie to the glory bestowed by their uncut hair. They testify of special spiritual authority in dealing with demon spirits, miracles, healings, angelic protection, and special discernment [revelations] all because of their uncut hair. These testimonies may be ignored but they continue to testify God has placed a great blessing upon those Sisters who do not cut their hair.
Recent rants and explosive blasphemies have come out against UPC Evangelist Lee Stoneking and Sister Ruth Rieder Harvey a UPC Pastor’s wife. Both have spoken out about uncut hair and a woman’s glory. Both have said that a woman with uncut hair has spiritual power as a covering over her body including special authority given to her by God. Both claim these holy sisters can obtain angelic protection, miracles, healings, and special discernment (revelations) based upon testimonies as well as proper interpretation of the word “power.” Because of what they have said and reported they are under blasphemous verbal attacks by Oneness mockers and scoffers claiming the purpose for their hate-rants is to stop the spread of what they call the heretical teachings of long uncut hair. They have labeled the miracles and power associated with uncut long hair as “the holy magic hair doctrine.”
The person behind calling a woman’s long uncut hair “the holy magic hair doctrine” blasphemy is a young man who claims he is a minister who has been liberated from the legalism of Oneness holiness. (edited this to remain on focus) He plans to destroy single-handed the Apostolic doctrine of long uncut hair.
There are other liberals and gainsayers who boldly confess it is not a sin for a woman to cut her hair. They are very angry that the two aforementioned persons are claiming women with uncut hair have a spiritual glory their women do not have with cut hair. This has raised up a hatred spirit against Evangelist Stoneking and Sister Harvey that is packaged in what they want others to believe is an innocent “questioning of their heresy.”
What are they so angry about? It is because both of these who support the Apostolic doctrine of a woman not cutting her hair have reported several kinds of different blessings, miracles, spiritual authority, discernment of the Spirit (special revelations), and even protection. All of these are claimed to not only be false, they are of the devil, satanic, witchcraft, and any teaching that a woman has special spiritual power or authority because of her long hair is heretical. Thus they call this the “holy magic hair doctrine.” By magic they mean the doctrine of a woman having long uncut hair as her glory is nothing but a teaching of witchcraft.
Here is a sample of their scoffing:
Sister Harvey and Brother Stoneking think a woman’s long hair can stop a tornado or hurricane.
They believe a woman who has long uncut hair can avoid rape.
They believe a woman with long hair can stop car wrecks and speeding trains.
They claim a woman’s long hair will protect her marriage from adultery.
They believe long hair gives them protection in their homes from burglars and fires.
They believe a woman can shake her long hair at the demon possessed and the demons will flee.
Of course all of this and more is nothing but mockery. A way to scoff and ridicule. Has Evangelist Stoneking or Sister Harvey ever made these claims? No! But they have correctly reported testimonies Sisters have given about miracles God has performed via the long uncut hair. One mother claims her child had a fever and she laid her hair across it and prayed God honor her for faith for her covering. She claims God instantly removed the fever. If God did just one miracle honoring a Sister’s faith demonstrated in her long hair, or if a Sister enjoyed just one special blessing when she let her hair down as her veil, this vindicates their faith not to cut their hair. The gainsayers can pout, spew their anger, deny it is so, but those who experience the blessings remain testimonies for uncut long hair.
Both Evangelist Stoneking and Sister Harvey have been clear, that when Paul speaks of “long hair” it is not talking about length but rather the uncut status of the hair. In the same manner, the prohibitation of long hair on a man means he is to cut it. You cut one and you do not cut the other. This is elementary application of rightly dividing the Word of God. The correct interpretation is the intent of the writer, not one’s opinion or theory rejecting the intent. So, the issue is not how long is long or how short is short, but “cut.” Of course if a man cuts his hair it will not grow long and if a Sister does not cut her hair it will grow to its natural length what ever that may be. An African Sister with short nappy hair that is uncut is just as holy as a Anglo Sister whose uncut hair reaches her knees. It is not how their hair is equal in length, but rather if it is equal in holiness and not cut, sheared, or shorn.
Have there been special blessings, miracles, spiritual authority exercised, discernment and special revelations by Apostolic Sisters with long uncut hair? Yes! There are many, many testimonies of these instances. Evangelist Stoneking and Sister Harvey have not fabricated or concocted a single false report. Yet they are now the brunt of hatred for their holiness stand on Apostolic sisters having uncut long hair. Even within the UPC, their own organizaton, they are looked upon as spiritually retarded.
I do not personally know Evangelist Stoneking or Sister Harvey. What I am writing is not in defense of the UPC as an organization or any standard or lack of one that group may have. I am writing in defense of the doctrine of the truth Paul wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost in 1Cor 11:15 concerning sisters having long uncut hair and the power or authority this brings into and upon her spiritual life. Evangelist Stoneking and Sister Harvey have spoken out on the doctrine of Paul and the authority and power associate with long uncut hair. In my opinion they gave honest and biblical perspectives.
Someone among the Oneness liberals has invented a blasphemous title to the women’s uncut hair blessing and called it the “MAGIC HAIR DOCTRINE” (MHD). There has been extensive mocking, scoffing, ridiculing, and personal blasphemy hurled at both of these individuals. Even David Bernard came out against them by refusing to acknowledge their doctrine was correct. He denies there is any special blessing upon a sister because of her long uncut hair. He also denies a sister can have special spiritual power upon herself that can be used in areas where faith is exercised, viz, miracles, healings, blessings, discernment [revelation]. The future head of the UPC has refused to accept the totality of the power of long uncut hair on Apostolic sisters.
Behind it all is the belief it is ok for a woman to cut her hair and there is no spiritual glory, power, or authority in long hair at all. To claim otherwise, they say is preaching there is MAGIC in her hair and this witchcraft is heretical. These equate the power God gives her with “magic.” This is an insult to God, calling his blessing upon long uncut hair witchcraft!
I have read some very hateful and condescending blasphemies against both of these individuals. To call their teaching on woman’s uncut hair “HOLY MAGIC DOCTRINE” and associate this with witchcraft is borderline unforgivable. And indeed the novice trying to pump up hatred against them, cannot be in the love of God. To call any part of the Word of God witchcraft, or to call a biblical interpretation of the scriptures witchcraft, could be blasphemy against the Holy Ghost since this doctrine is without doubt Holy Ghost inspired.
When someone sent me the MAGIC HAIR DOCTRINE accusation I went to the site, read and listened, and came away with shock at the manner in which Brother Stoneking and Sister Harvey were attacked, maligned, railed upon, and accused of all sorts of radical evils that neither of them said or believe.
The disrespect shown to both of these individuals could have come from no where but the pits of hell. Since I hold the very doctrine both of them stood for, I could not let the mockers and scoffers blaspheme and not speak up. I am standing up for a doctrine of the Apostolic Church. I am also standing up for the truth these two individuals have presented to the world for the Truth of God.
I know I do not see eye to eye with Evangelist Stoneking on everything and if we met we might clash over some of them and I certainly do not agree with Sister Harvey preaching or claiming to be a minister. But from those I know who know her, and have attended the church where her husband now pastors, she is a very loving and tender hearted sister. I resent her being called a hut woman and full of witchcraft spirits. I am sure they could find many reasons to disagree with me on a lot of things. But on this one issue, this subject of extreme importance, we do agree.
I have read where both of these individuals were hurt deeply by the slander, hate, and railing upon them by liberal backsliders among the Jesus name ranks. These same blaspmehers rejoice over this with glee, saying the uncut hair doctrine is witchcraft and they deserve to be hurt for hurting women’s feelings who cut their hair. These boast at how they are the most loving Oneness to be found any where near Cypress, Texas. But then turn and call the long hair doctrine of Paul witchcraft? No, the long hair doctrine is not witchcraft. No, it is not of the devil. No, Evangelist Stoneking and Sister Harvey are not trying to put witchcraft on Sisters by teaching them not to cut their hair.
A study of 1Corinthians 11 gives us seven terms needing rightly divided: Head, Shaving, Shorn, Covering, Shame, Power and Glory.
Head: can mean two things; first a person’s natural head; and second someone over a person in authority. The word “head” cannot always refer to a person in authority over the subject. It must be determined if “head” means the person’s own natural body. For instance, when the scripture says if it be a shame for a woman to have her head shorn or shaved, “head” cannot refer to her husband. When it says she can have power on her head because of the angels, it is refering to her natural head not her husband.
Shaving: as it implies is removing the hair with a razor right down to the scalp.
Shorn: is understood to be as shearing or cutting rather then shaving. Sheep are sheared or shorn and not shaved. Shorn then means to shorten the hair by cutting it.
Covering: is understood to be two-fold; first the natural uncut long hair of a female and second an artificial covering;.
Shame: This word describes something that is sinful, dishonorable, improper, disgrace, reproach, a feeling of personal embarrassment and personal disappointment. Shame is also associated with nakedness. This is the whole concept of “covering” in the veil whether it be long uncut hair or the artificial made of cloth. When an Aposotlic woman wears long uncut hair she can never be accused of being dishonorable, improper, a disgrace, or a reproach, to God. She removes these from her and stands ready to worship in the beauty of holiness. Is shame a sin? Yes, it means so throughout the scriptures. Look at Adam and Eve. It said they were not ashamed, Gen 2:25. But when they sinned, shame came on the scene and this act of the conscience condemned them. Shame is open condemnation. Only when a person has a seared mind will shame have no effect. There is a question of being shaved or shorn bringing shame because it signaled some act the public knew was unacceptable and this was the punishment. Christians were not to be public examples of shame from religious or secular conduct. Long uncut hair is not an example of shame but rather an example of the woman’s glory. She is not to cover this as if she is in shame. But, those shaved or shorn could wear an artificial covering and hide their condition until their hair grew back out.
I observed a sister who had cancer and went on chemo-therapy. Her hair all fell out. She felt so ashamed and embarressed. Not because she has sinned, but because she looked odd and no more the beauty of holiness. She wanted to wear a covering and her husband Pastor refused to allow her. She wanted to go buy a long hair wig and he refused to allow this. I was there and saw this sister sit in shame. She was not condemned because of sin. Her shame was not because of sin.
A sister had beautiful long hair. She was a nurse working with children. She wanted to donate her hair to some girls who had lukemia. I saw nothing biblical that she could not do this. I advised that if she did, she should wear an artificial covering veil until her hair grew back out. Her shaved head was not a shame in a sin sense, but she was ashamed because of her appearance. But she wanted to honor God with her hair and after she donated it. She had no purpose to cut it off and dazzle up what remained lookling like a Jezebel and flaunt her rebellion. Shame as Paul describes it for a man who wears long hair is certainly reference to sin.
Power: is her spiritual authority. The same word is used for casting out demons [Luke 9:1]; authority over all the power of the enemy [Luke 10:19]. Exactly what authority she will have because of her long hair must be spiritual. Applying spiritual power to her long hair is God’s personal gift for her obedience and faith. It may be this power is personal and does not extend to other persons. Or, it may be this power enables this woman to take authority in spiritual conditions she may encounter with others also. Consider that if she does not have this spiritual power and authority what is her loss if her head is shorn or shaved? Paul says it is a shame for her to be in the condition or shorn or shaved. There is no power or authority upon a woman who has her head shorn or shaved. What then is her loss? It is spiritual in that she does not have the blessing of God for herself or then for anyone else.
Some claim Christ is the woman’s covering and her hair has nothing to do with it. This begs the question then why Paul even mentions her long hair was given her for a covering veil. Certainly covering here means something with a spiritual nature separate from any salvation covering in Christ. This is personal and does not take away from her salvation covering. Her covering with long hair has to do with spiritual power and authority in her own life. Uncovering her head means to shear or shave it. Uncovering her head is not talking about uncovering her husband’s head.
Young’s Literal Interlinear
Translations translate verse 15 saying:
“woman’s long hair is given to her instead of a veil or covering.”
The Greek text reads her long uncut hair has been given to her for her veil.
The whole spiritual purpose of what ever an artificial veil would mean to a Sister is upon the one who has long uncut hair. There is indeed power and glory in this act of faith toward God.
Obviously if her long hair serves as her veil, she is in no need for a second artificial covering with a cloth, hat, rag, etc. Who ever heard of trimming, shearing, or having an artificial veil shorn? Certainly those who contend for the second artificial covering do not practice cutting them or trimming them. If a woman is not properly covered with long uncut hair then she should remove all of her hair and this means to get shaved. It is not a sin for a woman to shave her head. Paul even tells them to do it if they do not have long uncut hair. If a woman cuts her hair she is to go ahead and shave her head.
Glory: But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering [veil: Strong's 4018]: glory–dignity, honor, praise, worship (Strong’s #1391). Her hair acts as a veil before God. It is a covering in the natural sense and a covering of her soul in a spiritual sense. With her hair down as a veil it becomes her prayer veil and she should not pray or prophesy in public worship unless it is down. Who ever heard of stacking a veil on top of the head? Brides do not do this. Those sisters grieving at a funeral do not do it. Even the artificial veils should not be wadded up and stacked on top of the head.
An Israelite soldier could take a woman captive to be his wife, but first
she had to shave her head and pare her nails. After 30 days he could take her for a wife. It is apparent the shaving of her head is an external sign she is severing herself from her past life whether previously married or single. It is an act of sanctification and purifying. What the paring of her nails signifies we have no clue except it may denote her hands are now sanctified toward her new husband and to serve him. It is relevent then, that a woman who shears or shaves her head is in some manner severing herself from something. A Christian woman who was a true believer could not shear or shave her head unless it signified she was severing herself from the Christian life style. And that is exactly what they claim when they cut their hair. They claim they are severing themselves from legalism, bondage, fear-based standards, pastoral authority, husband authority, and Church authority. When they backslide cutting the hair signals the Sister is detaching herself from her former spiritual condition of holiness. Some are cutting their hair to signal they refuse any longer to be under any man’s authority or standards of holiness.
Shaving a woman’s head was a sign of her adultery.
Tacitus reports a woman caught in adultery:
“the husband expels the wife from the house nude, with her hair cut, and drives her through the whole village with a whip” (Tacitus Germania 19).
Regarding Demonassa, ruler of Cyprus:
“She gave the people of Cyprus the following three laws: a woman guilty of adultery shall have her hair cut off and be a harlot–her daughter became an adulteress, had her hair cut off according to the law, and practiced harlotry; . . .” (Dio Chrysostom Discourses, On Fortune 64.2-3).
Men always prayed bare-headed.
Regarding Romans:
“Why is it that when they worship the gods, they cover their heads, but when they meet any of their fellow-men worthy of honour, if they happen to have the toga over the head, they uncover?” (Plutarch, Moralia, The RomanQuestions 10).
“It is no piety to show oneself often with covered head, turning towards a stone and approaching every altar, none to prostrate upon the ground and to spread open the palms before shrines of the gods . . .” (Lucretius de Rerum Natura 5.1198-1201).
“. . . and when now thou raisest altars and payest vows on the shore, veil thy hair with covering of purple robe, that in the worship of the gods no hostile face may intrude amid the holy fires and mar the omens” (Virgil Aeneis 3.403-409).
“It was in accordance with the traditional usages, then, that Camillus, after making his prayer and drawing his garment down over his head, wished to turn his back; . . .” (Dionysius of Halicarnassus The Roman Antiquities 12.16.4).
Women in ancient Corinth were under some kind of religious obligation to wear a covering on their head when they appeared in public.
Regarding Romans:
“Why do sons cover their heads when they escort their parents to the grave, while daughters go with uncovered heads and hair unbound? . . . . ” (Plutarch, Moralia, The Roman Questions 14).
Regarding Spartans:
“When someone inquired why they took their girls into public places unveiled, but their married women veiled, he said, ‘Because the girls have to find husbands, and the married women have to keep to those who have them!’” (Plutarch, Moralia, Sayings of Spartans, Charillus 2).
Corinth was basically a Greek city, following Greek customs (cf. Dio Chrysostom Orationes 37.26: “he has become thoroughly hellenized, even as your own city has”).
“The mysteries inscription of Andania (Ditt. Syll.3, 736), which gives an exact description of women taking part in the procession, makes no mention of the veil. Indeed, the cultic order of Lycosura seems to forbid it. Empresses and goddesses . . . are portrayed without veils . . .” (Oepke in Kittel TDNT 1965, 3:562).
Greek prostitutes wore head coverings.
Catholic Encyclopedia
Rome herself held laws regarding veils. Catholicism admits Adopting the custom from the Roman vestal virgins:
”In ancient Rome a red veil, or a veil with red stripes, distinguished newly-married women from the unmarried. It was natural that the bride of Christ should, as the vestal virgins had done, adopt the veil, which thus symbolised not so much the purity as the inviolable fidelity to Christ which was to be reverenced in her.”
Jewish Encyclopedia
Bareheadedness of Women.
“In ancient Biblical times there is no indication that women covered their hair except with head-gears for ornament. The Shulammite’s long flowing locks are an object of admiration in the Song of Songs (iv. 1; vi. 5; vii. 5; compare Ezek. xvi. 7); and much art is bestowed in coquetry upon the braiding (see Isa. iii. 24; II Sam. xiv. 26; Judges xiii.). The woman suspected of adultery was therefore signally disgraced, or humiliated like a mourner, then for punishment her head was disheveled by the priest (Num. v. 18; compare Lev. xxi. 10; A. V. “uncover”).
Note on being shorn:
As a sheep is shorn it submits to the one having authority over it. Now if the sheep is not shorn at no time does it relinquish to anyone power over it. A woman who refuses to have her head shorn or shaven retains power and authority over herself. If she relinquishes this power and submits to someone to cut or shave her head, she has surrendered her own authority into the hands of another doing the cutting and shaving. She has humbled herself to submission in the acts of cutting and shaving. The same way Sampson submitted to Delilah and lost his power when his hair was cut. But, if a woman refuses to humble herself to this condition of shorn or shaved, she exercises her power and authority, retains it, and thus is veiled before God in a special way.
How much does God honor the veil? We need only read about the veil in its place in the tabernacle to understand this. The veil is a sign of a designated line between God’s glory and man’s right to invade it. God does not give anyone the right to lift or go past the veil, unless he so designates that person. The woman’s hair is her veil. In eastern nations some female may not remove their veil except in the presence of their husband. Angels will testify against her if she shows rebellion and refuses to honor God with her hair veil. Neither her husband or anyone else can usurp or remove her from the glory of her veil. This is between she and God alone.
Now some think they can shorten the veil, that is cut off some of it and it is still the God designed veil, but not so. The Veil in the temple was not be shortened and neither should the veil of the woman’s hair.
Transgender: Maybe we are missing an important observation in the long hair controversy. It is clear Paul was putting a distinction between males and females with his short and long hair doctrine. But was he really dealing with the Grecian transgender sexual apostates? Tansgender is when a person of one sex desires to cross over and act like a person of the opposite sex. This can lead to many different outward conducts, transvestism one of them. Usually this demands a different hair style to match the cross-gender a person is trying to duplicate. Is it very much possible that men who like women with short hair are showing a latent homosexuality? Whereas a woman who likes men with long hair are showing latent lesbianism? Can it be possible that behind the blasphemers crying “holy magic hair doctrine” opposing women having long uncut hair, are really pushing a transgender agenda? Are they not trying to undo Paul’s basic teaching of males with male hair lengths and females with long uncut hair lengths? In these days of bisexual and transgender church members trying to change Apostolic hair standards, we may be seeing the real identity of those who oppose men with short hair and women with long uncut hair.
Finally: there are those who believe if a woman wears an artifical veil that she can cut her hair any way she wants. There are those who believe the woman must not cut her hair and she must wear the second artificial veil. I do not draw lines of fellowship on the latter but I do the former. I count the second veil as no more then a scarf would be worn in cold climates for warmth. I count her uncut hair under her second covering. So, with those churches that practice the second veil I can have fellowship and make no contention. If they try to make me believe the second veil is essential to salvation in order to have fellowship, then I leave them alone.
To evangelist Stoneking and Sister Harvey: Thank You! Both of you are right on in your teaching of the woman’s power before the throne and the angels.
Pastor G. Reckart
Tampa, Florida
Posted by MONIQUE on February 2, 2009 at 11:44 am
May i call you brother? if so then i pray that you do some more research and fast and pray for revelation. I wont post this to you if i had not believe in it myself. right on this blog of yours you have under the learn section the apostolic ecucation bible studies you need to read for yourself. Men of God like evangelist Lee stoneking have done more seeking of God’s guidance with a lot of prayer and fasting into this subject and he wont do anything without God’s guidance. if you ever get close to him or even watch him preach you can tell that the Spirit of God is with him and you will be filled with the anointing of God too.He practices what he preaches ans what you see is what you get.
All am saying is that the second head covering is not at all needed but if you support the uncut hair and the second covering i can still worship with you because all that counts is the hair and there is no such contentions. I dont have to give you any other scriptures….you can read the bible your self. Just as it was difficult for so many of us to understand the godhead namely three in one and one in three even so men of unlearn wrestle with the scriptures to their own hurt. Prayer is the key brother and i am not saying you are unlearned i am saying there are things we need to learn still from one another. the Upci can teach you things and so can you that why we have the need to get together with each other. Dont let simple things keep us apart for when i get to heaven and you are there i will say hallelujah. Lets go on living for God and there is a saying that goes like this. Anything thats black and white needs not pray about but if its not then you need to pray. THe enemy has a way of hiding things from us and puting up spiritual blindness so we cant see the things of God especially if its concerning us and more so the power of God.
I understand that there are false prophets and i look out for them all the time and Lee stoneking and David Bernard aren’t one. Do like the Bereans do. when you hear or are told to do something the best thing to do is to go and research it untill you are satisfied. Dont stop until the peace of God rest in your heart and soul and spirit.
I know this may be hard for you to take at the moment but the only thing keeping us apart from doing whats right most times is pride. Hurting your members and congretion is hard to do but its better to do the right thing by the word of God than for to go to destruction.
I prefer to do more than what is expected of me than to do less
God open your eyes.
Posted by jesusblogger on February 2, 2009 at 1:06 pm
Thanks for all your posts. To cut a long story short, I do not believe a woman should cut off all her hair, as it is given as her glory. I believe that a woman’s hair should be covered when praying or prophesying, as scripture says. Why did the scripture distinctly say: ‘when praying or prophecying’ implying there are times the head did not need to be covered with a veil? Either way, I know you believe in holiness and I would not condemn you for your custom. Neither do I believe I should be condemned for my belief. We both have his Spirit, are buried in His name and live for Him in a life of holiness.
Posted by damion on February 8, 2009 at 2:03 pm
it was full time the oneness of god be piblish congratulation and there r stalwart who have done this such as BISHOP LUTHER MARTIN ALLISON BISHOP CHAMBERS etc may their soul rest in sweeet peace
Posted by Nathalie Gray on February 11, 2009 at 3:28 pm
Linda:
Flagaman does exist. I can help with the email address for Elder Howard Marks.
Posted by Pee on February 26, 2009 at 12:58 am
So happy to know there are others interested in Apostolic History in Jamaica/England – we must document the lives of the founding fathers.
I am completing my PHD and within my studies have been blessed to interview many of the early pioneers of the Apostolic Movement in Canada. Please pray that others will follow around the world so our next generation will be appreciative of the foundation that has been set by these brave and anointed men and women.
Blessings
Posted by Hyacinth Baker on May 6, 2009 at 5:09 pm
Greetings. I am glad to know that there is someone whois doing a study on our Oneness history in jamaica. I am doing a doctoral thesis on THE UNITY OF DIVERSE APOSTOLIC GROUPS and would like some of the resource you have on the historal part of the church. God bless you. pleases reply soon
Posted by Deon Rowe on March 20, 2009 at 11:46 pm
Praise Jesus,
God is good. All the comments are good, food for thought. Let us however, focus on the saving of our souls. I am strong believer in the covering of ones head for worship and praise. Let us abide by the words of God. Each organization has its own man made rules and if we want to be apart then let us abide by the rules that govern our own church and try to strive to holiness because without holiness we shall not see God.