Category: ruth reider harvey | Spiritual Abuse Blogs

Getting Out the Old Books: Power Before the Throne

We have been taught that long, uncut hair on a woman is a symbol of submission. These teachings are taken from 1 Cor 11:1-16. I am going to demonstrate that what is said to be a matter of submission is often actually a matter of control. It seems unreal that something that is taught to be a matter of submission becomes a matter of control and it is interesting how that happens. To demonstrate this, today I am going to take some quotes from one of the most popular of the hair books in Oneness Pentecostalism, Power Before the Throne by Ruth Rieder (Harvey).

There is a lot that could be written and said here but I want to hone in on a few quotes: “We can actually open our homes for evil spirits to come in if we are in rebellion. Your uncut hair brings protection to the entire family. My sister related a story to me of a young minister’s wife in the Dominican Republic. Her husband was a very promising young man in the Bible School, an exceptional preacher. My sister and her husband consistently taught on holiness in the Bible School throughout the work there. This young woman had long hair, but she persisted in trimming it despite what was taught. She opened her home for an invasion of the enemy because she lifted the covering through her disobedience. Before long, her husband fell into adultery with a girl in their neighborhood. Their lives were shattered, and their ministry was completely ruined. The spirit of vanity had caused her to become more concerned about the appearance of her split ends than about her obedience to God.” (Pg 68-69)

So let’s look at this a little closer. The idea behind uncut hair is supposed to be submission but what it ends up being is about control. The message is this: Women can control whether evil spirits come into their homes with uncut hair. Women can keep their husbands from committing adultery with uncut hair. If evil spirits enter your home and you have cut hair, it’s your fault. You can control all these things, simply by having uncut hair.

“Can our husband’s hearts safely trust in us to guard the glory and to insure divine protection for our family so that no wicked spirit can enter in to spoil us? What an awesome responsibility, yet what a tremendous privilege that God has entrusted to the woman.” (pg 69) So, the idea is that women insure divine protection to the home by their own choice of whether or not to cut their hair and that the husbands and families are reliant upon their wives for this divine protection. This is not about submission. It’s about control.

“…This lady’s son was in a very serious car accident…this frantic mother…reminded God of how a scissors never touched her hair……the doctors came back, expecting to see a young man who was possibly dead. Instead they found he had regained consciousness and was responding…..His mother had guarded the glory and had power on her head because of the angels.” (pg 72-73)

The message here is that you can have some amount of control over health and sins of others if you simply do not cut your hair. Instead of having faith in God no matter what our circumstances are, women are taught that if they do not cut their hair, they have “power”….”power before the throne”….”power on her head because of the angels”….. Whatever the verses in 1 Cor. 11 mean, I don’t think they mean that if you don’t cut your hair (which is never mentioned in 1 Cor. 11, by the way) that you can control whether your husband has affairs or whether your children recover after accidents. Submission does not mean control and the hair message is about control demonstrated by the examples shown. This message of control can be very appealing to women, and is also convenient for men, because if their wives believe that the husband’s behavior is in the wife’s control, men don’t have to take responsibility for their own behavior. This is a very co-dependent way of thinking and fits right into dysfunctional relationships.

I have provided photos of four pages. Page 68, page 69, page 72, page 73.

(Written for the Facebook group Breaking Out.)

Getting Out the Old Books: The Literal Word by M.D. Treece
Getting Out the Old Books: Guardians of His Glory by Gary & Linda Reed
Getting Out the Old Books: David F. Gray
Getting Out the Old Books: Joy Haney
Getting Out The Old Books: Larry L. Booker
Getting Out the Old Books: Power Before the Throne
Getting Out the Newer Books: Wholly Holy: The Vital Role of Visible Devotion
Search For Truth On Holiness

********
Shop at our Amazon store! As an Amazon Influencer, this website earns from qualifying purchases.

Don’t You Wear That Jewelry

I noticed a woman who appeared to be a sister in the Lord. Preparing to greet her, I stopped short upon catching sight of earrings dangling from her ears. Pierced ears identified her allegiance and revealed the influence that held sway in her life.

– Ruth Harvey in Reflecting The Glory

Many unhealthy churches teach that jewelry is wrong to wear. Some teach that its use brings about vanity and pride, calling attention to the wearer. Ruth Harvey gives it a twist. For those unaware, Ruth is a United Pentecostal Church minister, though she wasn’t licensed when she wrote this book. Perhaps she never looked into her organization’s history to see that some women, such as Ethel Goss, Nell Morgan and Olive Haney, did wear jewelry. Her teaching on the subject has branded them and many others as under the influence of the devil.

Ruth claims that “precious stones were initially created for the express purpose of reflecting God’s glory. When Lucifer was cast as profane from the mountain of God, jewels ceased to be a medium whereby God reflected His glory. After his expulsion from Heaven, satan used jewelry to effect his influence in the earth.” She shares no scripture to lend support to these claims.

Interestingly, Ruth neglects to disclose how God’s people are seen wearing or being given jewelry in the Bible. (This is a good example of why I stress the need to look into what the ‘whole’ or all of the Bible teaches on a matter.) For instance, when Abraham sent his servant to find a wife for Isaac, he gave Rebekah and her family jewelry made of gold and silver (Genesis 24). In the book of Exodus, the Israelites are given all manner of silver and gold jewelry and later at least some gave these as a free offering to God, to be used in the construction of the tabernacle and things related to it. There are other references to jewelry that show it was freely used.

Instead she shares about seeing a woman who was talking to herself, dressed in what she considered to be a “bizarre” manner. All her jewelry is mentioned. It is claimed the woman was demon possessed and the impression given is that the jewelry was tied to it. She proclaimed “her captivity was disclosed in the magnitude of jewelry that she wore.” The message is clear. One risks being possessed should they wear jewelry and the more you wear, the more “control of our lives” the devil will have.

What can we conclude? Though Ruth speaks against the use of any jewelry, she was unable to share even one passage stating God is against its use. Instead of not greeting the woman who was wearing earrings, she judged her as being influenced by the devil, and never tried talking to her to discover who she really was.

Ruth’s teaching is one of the more far-fetched I have seen in the attempts by some to persuade people to not wear jewelry. No matter how hard one searches, they will find no prohibition of jewelry in the Bible. No, not even 1 Peter 3:3 or 1 Timothy 2:9. And if it is wrong to use jewelry because it brings attention to the person, then wouldn’t wearing feathers, scarves and bows do the same (things Ruth herself has worn)?

Those who have had this prohibition ingrained in them can break free from the fear and erroneous teaching. I suggest using a concordance to look up everywhere that jewelry is mentioned in scripture. You will discover passages which show it being used and nothing stating God forbids it.

Some who discover the truth about the teaching may never wear any jewelry and that is perfectly fine. Others have had fun trying different pieces and learning their likes and dislikes.

********
Shop at our Amazon store! As an Amazon Influencer, this website earns from qualifying purchases.

Twisted Word Meanings: Shorn

One indicator of an unhealthy church is when the meanings of words are changed. By doing this, what they teach appears on the surface to be backed by scripture. However, when one discovers that the twisted meaning is not the same as was meant in the passage(s) they use as a proof text, it will help them break from these erroneous teachings.

For those who believe that the word shorn in the Bible simply means to cut without regard to how much, I share with you a great picture demonstration that shows a half-shorn sheep. It is the copyright of photographer Cary Wolinsky.

The word shorn in 1 Corinthians 11 is twisted by some in an attempt to prove a teaching that claims women are never to cut their hair for any reason, not even a fraction of an inch. Some take the teaching even further and claim a woman protects herself and her family by keeping her hair uncut. Ruth Rieder Harvey of the United Pentecostal Church (UPC), has taught that believers replaced Lucifer as the protector and reflector of God’s glory and women accomplish this through following such holiness rules as not cutting their hair. UPC evangelist Lee Stoneking lamented in a sermon, if only Christians knew what witches and New Agers know. If witches can double the power of spells by letting their hair down and shaking it in the wind, what could our [Apostolic] women do with power on their heads?

Oh what great lengths some people take in their efforts to prop up a teaching in order to convince others to believe in and follow their ordinance.

UPC minister Daniel Segraves, in his book Women’s Hair: The Long And Short Of It, attempts to change the biblical meaning of shorn in an attempt to persuade women to follow the teaching. After using three regular dictionaries and three biblical reference books, he states: “That, while ‘shorn’ can mean ‘to cut close,’ it is certainly not limited to that meaning. Indeed, the preponderance of dictionary definitions are on the side of interpreting ‘shorn’ as simply ‘to cut,’ without specifying how much! …While a minority of the definitions could possibly apply to cutting closely, the majority testimony is that ‘shear’ simply means ‘to cut.’

Someone from biblical times would not have related to this conclusion by Segraves. To them, and to Paul who is the author of Corinthians, shorn meant to cut closely, just like is demonstrated in this picture by Wolinsky. People then were very much acquainted with the practice. If anyone had removed an inch of the wool on this sheep and tried to tell people that it was shorn, the onlookers would have heartily laughed. They knew that a shorn sheep was one where almost all the wool had been removed.

Take care to independently search out for yourself what is taught. Check to ensure that the meaning given is actually what was meant in the passage. You may find a night and day difference between scripture and what you hear from the pulpit.

********
Shop at our Amazon store! As an Amazon Influencer, this website earns from qualifying purchases.