Category: holiness standards | Page 14

The hardest thing about spiritual abuse

In early 2000 I was thrown out of a church. The process lasted several agonizing weeks, but things had been very bad for months. There was the man who kept telling me he was praying I’d lose my job because I was a woman and should work close to the church. There were the high standards that made no sense to me, the preaching about begging God for a special revelation of oneness because if you didn’t have that you would surely go to hell… after all, if you didn’t have that, you surely didn’t know God. The pastor bragged about his long fasts and groaned about people not wanting to ‘hear the truth.’ He didn’t share information with everyone, just with the men. The men were to tell their wives at home, which excluded me as a single woman. He told me that I needed a man over me, that I should either get married or move home to my dad’s house. Neither of those was an option. And there was the sermon about how if we leave our local church we have cut ourselves off from God, from life, from forgiveness, as though we have amputated ourselves from the body of Christ.

I remembered last night how, on December 31, 1999, I was terrified that God was going to come back and thought I’d surely be lost. I spent that night on the living room floor, sobbing and begging God to forgive me for who knows what, and never feeling any peace or forgiveness. I realize in my mind now that what I was dealing with was not conviction but condemnation, and fear, not godly sorrow or repentance. There was no peace or forgiveness because I wasn’t repenting of anything. I’d done nothing wrong except attend where I did and believe what I did, and those weren’t things I would recognize should be repented of for many years.

God didn’t come back on December 31, 1999. The pastor told me about a month later that he discerned I had bad thoughts and if I didn’t change, he would throw me out. He then left town for several weeks. How does a person change thoughts someone thinks they have, but they don’t? I ‘repented.’ I spent hours more on the floor, sobbing and asking God to change me. I stopped eating, thinking I would fast until they returned. But I thought they would be gone for a week at most, not several. I finally had to eat, and felt I was condemning myself by doing so. I tried to reach them by phone so that I could talk to them before breaking my fast, but they wouldn’t answer at first and then answered only to tell me to stop calling them. I called everyone at the church asking them to forgive any offense real or imagined, and was later accused of calling them threatening to kill myself instead.

These things had a psychological impact, but the spiritual impact was greater. I’d started attending there with a fairly healthy view of God and faith. By the time I left, my self confidence had been torn out from under me (I felt guilty just for being invited out to eat, because ‘saints’ shouldn’t eat with the ungodly-1 Cor 5:11), but more than that, my faith in God had been shredded as well. I repented, but I hadn’t felt forgiveness, and certainly hadn’t seen any forgiveness from others at the church, not even the ‘man of God,’ the pastor. I begged God for the special revelation we supposedly must have, but never really understood or experienced anything about this ‘revelation’ as the pastor described it. I fasted for days but was still thrown out. My pastor had discerned something evil in me, some thought I didn’t know I had, and though I’d prayed and fasted and repented, things only got worse.

Above all of this, these things had happened during a time when I’d thought I was closest to God. I was praying in tongues often, studying the bible, feeling the emotionalism in church, living by the high standards set, close to the pastor and his family (at least in my mind), repeatedly playing the sermons and music I was told to, and was very involved in bus ministry, Sunday School, and music at church.

All of these ended the night the pastor called me and told me never to come back. No one but me ever realized they ended, because that night I lost every person who might have known. I went to another similar church, but was told there to pretend nothing had happened and just ‘move on’. I couldn’t move on, though, and I couldn’t talk about the reasons I couldn’t, since I was to pretend nothing was wrong… and since admitting these things would have been good reason for the new pastor to label me ‘backslid.’ The only thing to do at that point would be to ‘pray through’. More fear, more nights on the floor sobbing, begging God for something that at that point I knew wouldn’t happen. To make matters worse, just as I would start to heal somewhat and begin to feel that there might be hope, something else would happen and the doubts would come back, as well as all of the memories.

Of everything that happened in my 19 years in Pentecost, that’s what had the most lasting damage. That combination–the fear, the condemnation, the false teachings that backed them, but most of all the doubt that they instilled. Not just self doubt, but faith shattering doubt of the Bible and of God.

Things are better now. I am healing, slowly. There have been times I wanted to just walk away from all of it. It would be easier not to believe than to fight through the mess that was left after everything happened. But there have also been times of learning and growth, and for me, these have been the most healing, times when I saw the scriptures that were used against me in a different light and I realized how wrongly they’d be used, times when I recognized some of what caused the damage and was able to rebuild, to heal, and to finally move forward, not as though nothing had happened, but in spite of what has.

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

Amish Revisited/Did He really say that?

Recently, I watched a three hour episode about the folks who broke Amish were now returning to their roots in Punxsutawney, PA.

Mary, the mother had her fling in New York, even shed her Amish garb and bonnet for a day, but alas the “English” life is not for her. She’s going back to try to repair the damage she did by leaving. If you are Amish and you make the decision to leave, you will be shunned when you try to come back. During this episode, they are focusing on a particularly harsh reality of the Amish (as well as other cult type religions) – if you give up the rules – you will not associate with them under any circumstance. Her dad died and she is not allowed to attend the funeral. Now mind you, she has re-assumed all of the outer garb, looks the part, and is trying to get back into their good graces but no, she is not allowed in.

She is going to visit the leader and give him a piece of her mind about not letting her in to her father’s funeral. Their confrontation goes like this: The leader says, “What are you doing here with cameras and all that worldly stuff? You are shunned; you are not allowed to be around other Amish.” Mary replies, “My Amish mother wanted me to sit beside her and then you come in acting all big and not letting me sit beside my own mother.” Then he says, “The HOLY SPIRIT was telling me to make you leave.” She argues about wanting to pay her last respects to which he replies, “A woman should never come here and talk to a man like you are doing. A woman is supposed to be with her husband.” Mary says her piece, “I want you to know that what you did was a lot worse than anything I ever did!” Determined to get the last word in (brace yourself) he tells her, “You better watch out or a lot of bad stuff will start happening to you if you don’t start behaving, GET OFF MY PROPERTY!”

Sound familiar? Try to leave the group, or speak out, and the threats start to fly. But the thing that really stuck out to me is the unbiblical use of the Holy Spirit that these Bible based cults use. They assign all types of activities to the Holy Spirit that I’m certain He would have no part in and are not in keeping with His nature. Would the Holy Spirit tell him not to allow her into her father’s funeral? Jesus called the Holy Spirit the “Comforter,” one who comes along side us, our helper. The chief fruit of the Holy Spirit is love, with the out flow of love being peace, joy, gentleness, goodness, faithfulness, kindness, and self-control. Love is not rude or arrogant; it keeps no record of wrongs.

Another sad and noteworthy statement of this revisiting is made by Mary’s daughter in law, Rebecca. She states, “Amish, I’ll always be Amish on the inside.” No matter how many of the outward trappings of Amish life she leaves behind, she always reverts back to Amish standards when challenged by someone else’s willingness to go beyond her level of freedom. This is indeed the sad fact of many whose minds are trapped by legalistic standards as a way of proving their worth. These standards become the essence of their salvation, never mind a crucified Christ. They never really make it to that place of freedom they are so desperately seeking but live tortured lives of being half in the old life and half out.

Christ has set us free to live a free life. So take your stand! Never again let anyone put a harness of slavery on you. Galatians 5:1 MSG

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

Dear Church, Part 3

I was taught to look at how people were dressed and what they did to determine if they were Christians. When things got really bad at my unhealthy church and people started shunning me, I started seeking fellowship online. I ended up in a group of people who were supposedly all from the same background as me, and I enjoyed being on there.

Soon after I started fellowshipping on that discussion board, I started to realize they did NOT all believe like me… and I started making a list. Those who were “hardliners” and “conservatives” like me, people I could trust on one side, and “liberals” and “backsliders” on the other side. People I couldn’t trust, people I needed to watch out for because what they said might make sense, but it was probably dangerous.

I began my list and worked on it for probably a week. As I did, I began to realize something: those on the “bad” side of the list were the kinder, gentler, humbler people, while those on the “good” side, the ones I would fellowship in real life, were often cruel. In an online environment, where I couldn’t judge everyone by their clothes, hair, or certain actions, but it was easier to see character and love, goodness, kindness, meekness, self-control and so forth, I gravitated to the “wrong” group-the liberals and backsliders-nearly every time. They were the ones who exhibited the fruit of the spirit. They were the ones who showed mercy and love.

I threw the lists away, stopped looking at people’s appearances, and started considering their hearts. Doing so changed my world.

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

Search for Truth on Holiness

Many of you know that Search for Truth is a home Bible study usually given to new converts. There is also Search for Truth II. Surprisingly to outsiders or those coming into Oneness Pentecost (OP), there is little teaching on what is called “holiness standards.” (When an OP person says “holiness standards” they are often referring to the dress code).

Most of the teaching in SFT is Bible teaching and teaching on the OP view of salvation and what it takes to be saved. In all of Search for Truth 1, there is one chart, and one page explaining this chart, on holiness in the teacher’s manual. This is out of 61 teaching charts for the student and the 133 page teacher’s manual. So, something that seems very central to OP teaching is more or less in OP teachings, a sideline. This can be confusing and perplexing to both outsiders and new converts. In Search for Truth #1, there is no teaching whatsoever on particular standards. In the chart shown in the photo, the emphasis is on holiness, separation and not touching the unclean thing. There is one quoted scripture about clothing, 1 Tim. 2:9-10 and it says “Watch Your Appearance – Women adorn themselves in modest apparel.” So, at this point the student is taught biblical principles only, and no specifics, at least as far as the charts themselves are concerned.

Once a person has been taught 10 weeks of Bible study according to OP doctrine, they sometimes start Search for Truth II. This is 12 more weeks of Bible Study. There is a mild teaching about separation-talking about the Jews, in lesson 4, chart 4 called “Holy People, Separated Unto God.” Then, there is much more Bible teaching about many things-dispensations, the New Covenant, etc. Only when you come to lesson 9-Chart 6 does Search for Truth begin to address any dress standards. So, the student has been sitting through at least 18 lessons before the subject is taught on in any depth.

First, the chart says “A Holy People, Separated Unto God.” Does this sound familiar? That’s because it is the exact same title mentioned before, on the lesson about the Jews being separate unto God, only this time, it’s about the Christian. Again, the focus is on the principles and about how Christians are to be separate from the world. After this foundation is laid, the author goes into Practical Application (in the teacher’s manual). Here’s where the actual clothing standards begin to be addressed.

The first thing mentioned is legalism. They define the legalist as someone who has no genuine love for God but just follows rules, so they head off the argument against legalism right away. This can and does happen (someone just following rules), as we have seen in cases where some who completely follow all these dress rules have affairs or do other things like them. Surprisingly, the OP movement believes that these rules are somewhat of a measuring stick to your spirituality, which is surprising since they admit you can follow them without following God. In speaking of legalists the author writes: “By obeying certain “holiness standards,” they hope to satisfy God’s legal requirements, thus earning their salvation.” (pg 210) What the OP movement does not admit to though, is that they believe, mostly, that you can’t follow God without following these rules.

There is teaching on not sinning “with your eyes.” I find it interesting what is all lumped together here: “By reading material that emphasizes pornography, nudity, sensual love stories, monsters, crime, violence, the occult or witchcraft.” (pg 211) So, apparently reading a monster story or a crime novel is akin to watching pornography, which makes little sense. It does suggest making personal determinations, which is valid. It goes on about not sinning with your ears (it mentions rock music and country music- which in my experience was an OP favorite- one of those contradictions that no one wants to address).

The lesson goes on. Don’t love the world. Finally, dress is mentioned. It says “When we look for scriptural principles, we find that they apply to every culture and every age.” (pg 211) Any Christian will agree with that statement! “Immodest apparel, then, would be any clothing which by its brevity or tightness reveals the body in a way that entices the opposite sex with lustful thought and desires.” (pg 211) Any Christian would also agree with this statement.

“To the women he (Paul) says: dress modestly, with moderation; do not wear gold, pearls and costly array.” This lesson seems to do a good job at teaching principles so far, but the definitions will come later in the lesson and in the actual church culture. “A woman’s clothing should be modest, rather than expensive and flashy, and that she should avoid extravagant adornment.” (pg 212) “Make-up could also fit this category…..several OT passages describe women who wore make-up…always they were depicted as evil, unfaithful, adulterous women. The badge of their wicked ways was adornment of jewels and make-up.” I think the writer forgot to mention Proverbs 31:22 “She maketh herself coverings of tapestry; her clothing is silk and purple.” and Proverbs 25:12 “As an earring of gold, and an ornament of fine gold, so is a wise reprover upon an obedient ear.” Notice this doesn’t say, as a Jezebel wanting to seduce her lover, so is a reprover upon an obedient ear but it speaks of jewelry in a positive light. Or Song of Solomon 1:10 “Thy cheeks are comely with rows of jewels, thy neck with chains of gold.”

(Here are some of the lessons in the actual OP church culture, which I want to mention but are not mentioned in these lessons: Don’t wear gold in the form of a necklace or earrings, but wedding rings, buttons, tie tacks, cuff links, and hair decorations are all okay. Don’t wear pearls in the form of a necklace but pearls as buttons and in the hair are okay. Costly array, well, we never bother worrying about that one, especially at General Conference).

The problem is not the teaching of the actual principle. The principles are valid for all cultures and all times, just like was said in the beginning of the lesson….the problem is that the author begins to take personal preferences and interject them into the lesson, according to OP culture, leaving out anything that teaches a possible different view of scripture. As authors before him, he begins to take scriptures, make implications and suggestions and then drives it home with “Regardless of our preferences, God’s opinion concerning make-up and jewelry is what matters most! We want to please him!” This is a true statement when it stands alone. However, when implications are made that make-up and jewelry are wrong, scriptures are given to “prove” it (omitting any scripture to the contrary) and then the statement is made about “God’s opinion” and it leads the student to believe that OP cultural tradition is the same as God’s opinion, and that if you don’t follow OP culture and tradition, you don’t want to please God!

The lesson continues. Deuteronomy 22:5 is quoted and the first thing the writer writes is “An abomination is something that God hates!” (pg 212) This sets the student up to know that they certainly don’t want to dress like the opposite sex or they will be an abomination to God. Then, the definitions begin. The author writes about a male pastor preaching in a dress and that in another 50 years women’s clothing will be acceptable for men. The student, seeing the obvious shift in society, likely agrees. The author then leads in. “Eighty years ago, a woman wearing pants was labeled indecent and ungodly. Society has changed but God’s Word has not!”

The author leads the student right into the idea that God’s Word is being broken if a woman wears pants. However, Deut. 22:5 doesn’t say anything about pants. Deut 22:5 teaches a principle that a person should not wear that which pertains to the opposite sex. When a woman wears pants, does most of society believe she is wearing men’s apparel? No. Even in our society today, there are clear cut ways to show you want to dress as a member of the opposite sex. A clear message can be given. A woman in pants does not give this message even though it did give that message eighty years ago.

The author drives home more about “abomination(s) to God.” The author talks about different nations having different customs and says “Yet a distinction exists between the clothing of each sex. At a distance one person should be able to tell whether a person is male or female by their clothing. A unisex culture with no immediately observable difference in apparel is immoral!” Well, I can usually tell a man from a woman in our culture. Those that I can’t are usually intentionally not making it apparent.

The author then says we are reaping the harvest of confusing the roles of male and female in their clothing. “Men are acting like women and women like men; homes are breaking up; homosexuality is on the rise; children are being raised in a culture where they cannot determine their proper roles”. (pg 212) So, the insinuation is made that broken homes and homosexuality being on the rise are at least partially the fault of women who won’t wear skirts daily.

The writer then goes on to talk about hair length. The author writes immediately about “long, uncut hair” on a woman, quoting 1 Cor 11:13-16 (pg 212), leaving the reader to believe that long equals uncut in no uncertain terms, leaving no room for any other interpretation.

The lesson ends with a summary of principles and presenting our bodies as a living sacrifice. It leaves the student with a mind-spinning menagerie of things to think through. Mostly, it leaves the student with these ideas: If you want to serve God, not be an abomination to Him, please Him and live for Him you need to: 1. Wear dresses as a female 2. Not wear make-up or certain jewelry 3. Not cut your hair as a woman and have short hair as a man 4. Do these things to present your body as a living sacrifice and be a separate and holy person.

One reason there is so much fear surrounding questioning these definitions is that a woman (or man) must deal with these ideas: If I question, am I moving towards being an abomination to God? Am I contributing to divorce and homosexuality in our culture? Am I refusing to submit to those that have the rule over me?

Sometimes when a person reads Deut 22:5: “The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God,” they actually see or hear in their head: “The woman shall not wear pants and men shall not wear skirts for all that do so are an abomination to God.” But that’s not actually what the verse says. Many of the other “holiness” teachings are like-wise. Then sins like infidelity, molestation and extortion get sometimes (unintentionally, usually) overlooked, while a woman gets scorned for wearing a necklace. It becomes a false balance. And what is a false balance? “A false balance is abomination to the LORD: but a just weight is his delight.” Proverbs 11:1

Here are some links for the Search for Truth PDF’s:
SFT I Chart: https://search4truth2.com/DOCs/study/search4truth1-chart.pdf
SFT I Teacher’s Manual: http://omsify.com/resources/pdfs/SFT1-MAN.pdf
SFT II Chart: https://mballestero.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/sft2chts.pdf
SFT II Teacher’s Manual: http://www.fullertonpentecostals.com/uploads/2/0/0/4/20047357/sft2man.pdf

SFT #1 was originally copyright in 1965 by Search For Truth and was later revised by the UPC in 2003.
SFT #2 was originally Light For Living that was written by Jerry Twentier and Marcella Willhoite in 1985. It was later revised in 2003 by J. L. Hall, Kenneth Haney, Philip Dugas, and Nathaniel Haney.

(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.

Dear Church, Part 2

Dear church:

Some of you posted on Facebook, statements like “how can anyone call themselves Christian and vote for ____.” Some of you got upset when I responded that my faith in Jesus-not my vote-made me a Christ-follower, a Christian. Some of you have taken pride in standing for what you believe is right… and trying to push others to believe what you do through humiliation, name-calling, mockery, and guilt-tripping. And I cry.

You see, I did some of those things too, once. Not over who to vote for, but over even more minor things. I questioned your Christianity, your faith, because you didn’t wear certain clothes or do your hair a certain way. I questioned your faith because you didn’t believe what I believed, and I knew I had to be right. You’d have said (some of you did say) I was in a cult at that time. But now… now I see you saying such similar things, using such similar tactics for things you believe or think all Christians should do. And you don’t realize that it’s the same wrong attitude.

You don’t understand why your statements make me angry or sad, and you haven’t taken the time to sit down and think through what you’re saying. I understand how you must feel, because I spent 19 years doing what you’re doing. And repented. You rejoiced when I left that attitude behind. When I humbly accepted that I’d been wrong to be part of that and treated you like I did. It may be time for you to do the same.

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