Children Raised Under Spiritual Abuse III

In my career as a social worker, we have case studies that we use to examine a person’s life story in order to assess and evaluate how to best help the individual. When we are sharing with other professionals, we give the individual client a made up name in order to protect their privacy.

I have chosen this method to introduce to you some people I have known who have shared with me their stories of being raised in a spiritually abusive environment. Because of being raised in such a climate, many of these individuals still have parents or other family members who are in these groups, and therefore do not want to be identified in a public blog, due to the very difficult task of trying to maintain family relations with loved ones who are still in the group. I have honored their need for confidentiality.

Grace was born into the spiritually abusive environment she now believes to be a cult. Her father was a United Pentecostal Church ordained minister, and both grandfathers were also ordained in the same organization. Grace’s parents were evangelists, traveling around and preaching almost every night of the week for different churches in the United States. This was many years ago and Grace’s parents traveled by auto, staying in the homes of the pastors for which they preached.

During this time period, Grace was approximately two months old when her father decided one day that her screaming was “anger”, and that she was “throwing a tantrum.” He spanked her infant legs with his hand, a couple of swats to make it sting and begin teaching her early that “anger is a sin.” At her next doctor’s appointment, it was discovered that her mother, who’d been trying to breastfeed her, was not making enough milk, and the cries were cries of hunger and tummy discomfort. Grace is unclear about her parent’s feelings in this regard, simply stating that they recorded it in her baby book with a “ha, ha” beside the date of her “first spanking,” even after they knew about the hunger.

Grace says her parents did love her and did not intend to be cruel, but the toxic environment was one both of them had been raised in, and they were simply doing what they thought was right at the time, based on their intense devotion to the God they’d been taught to believe was a demanding God of judgement.

Grace describes how her parents bragged for many years to their saints and to her and her siblings that they knew how to “train a child” to “behave in the house of God,” because they had trained her at nine months of age to “sit on the front row” during song service, alone with no adult. “If you got up or turned around, one of us would come off the platform (her mom was playing an instrument and her dad was leading service) and spank you, then sit you back down. You learned quickly. We know even babies can be trained.” Grace says their reasoning for this was that they were “home missionaries” starting a church and did not have a trustworthy adult yet converted to help watch her during service.

Grace says that some of her earliest memories were related to church. She says she can strongly relate to a title of a pop song that recently became popular, called “Sit Still Look Pretty,” because that was what she was told to do often as a little girl. She remembers wearing ruffled dresses with itchy tulle slips under them, squirming because she was uncomfortable in those clothes as they irritated her skin, but she would often be reprimanded for moving or swatted on the leg if she could not sit still.

She remembers her grandmother being reprimanded from the pulpit by her father, during one of his sermons, because the grandmother was drawing pictures for her to keep her entertained during the long sermons that were completely beyond her ability to understand.

Grace remembers taking candy from a Sunday School room at about age five and then, when her mother found out, she told Grace that it was stealing, it was a sin, and she would be lost for taking candy like that. She was led in a prayer of repentance and sent to apologize to the Sunday School Teacher. She still remembers the heavy sense of guilt, though she really didn’t know it was stealing when she did it.

From age five, when her sense of sin was awakened by the “stealing” event, Grace describes how she would “seek the Holy Ghost” every service, going down to the altar and kneeling there as long as she could stand it to pray and ask for the experience of speaking in tongues. This went on every service for three years, until she finally received the experience at the age of eight. She remembers being baptized “in Jesus’ name” not long before that, and how “I really did feel very clean and light inside,” but wonders if it was the baptism itself or the belief in what it was doing (taking away her sins).

Grace recalls a time around nine years of age when “we were having a shouting service” and she and a friend around the same age fell out on the floor and rolled back and forth “because we had heard them preach about holy rollers being really spiritual”. Adults stopped them from continuing, but she remembers being confused about why they would lift up such a thing verbally, but yet stop the girls from actually doing it. She remembers a mixture of shame and confusion about the incident.

Out of 12 years of education, Grace says only two and a half years were in a public school. “Three years were our own church school, and the rest of the time I was home-schooled.” She says she did not learn some of the things that are normal for school aged young people to learn. “I never learned anything about Greek mythology, and even the philosophers were barely mentioned in the context of Paul’s visit there.” She relates that her education was very poor in mathematics, and that she distinctly remembers her father slapping her when she couldn’t figure out how to do a math problem. She remembers a lot of yelling at her as well, when it came to learning math.

Grace describes herself as a “very shy, timid teenager, easily brought to tears.” She says that, because of the environment, she was highly sensitive and full of shame and guilt that was largely misplaced.

“The church rules…you never questioned them”. She learned as a toddler that pants, cut hair, and makeup were sins for women and she would point out people she saw wearing these things and ask her mother “Is that lady Catholic?” She apparently equated sinfulness with the Catholic religion, as is so often done over UPC pulpits.

No jewelry of any kind was allowed, and strict rules governed the sleeve length and dress length of her clothing. “We stopped wearing short sleeves when I was about ten,” she remembers. No slits of any length were ever allowed in skirts, and sleeves were required to be below the elbow. Hems were below the knee “sitting, standing or kneeling.” She said her long uncut hair was at one time to her ankles, “but we were not allowed to wear our hair down if we were going to be on the platform. It was considered stringy and unkempt.” She remembers that, when going around family members who were not in the group, her parents would make sure she braided her hair or wore it in a bun so that “we will be a good testimony to the family.” Somehow, even though her hair was praised and glorified throughout her lifetime, Grace knew that it looked “like a hippy” when it was down and obviously untrimmed.

Grace calls herself a “girly-girl” because she always loved beautiful things, but says that she had to confine it to lace and flowers for most of her life because most pretty things were forbidden–such as jewelry, makeup, nail polish, etcetera.

Grace describes hearing many sermons about women staying in their place, but mostly from her father’s associates, not from him. She says this is probably likely to the fact that his mother was also a preacher when he was a child. However, submission was a topic that was preached in great doses, especially submission to one’s husband and primarily to the pastor.

Grace ends our interview by relating that she feels the most harmful part of being raised in this environment was the fact that the parents controlled the children to such a degree, and then her parents used the pastoral role to control her even further. “The pastor could tell you to do anything, even if the Bible didn’t say do it. You had to do it because the pastor said and if you didn’t you were going to hell, because the pastor was God’s man and you had to obey him as if he was God.” Grace says that, where parental boundaries fell short, her father was adept at “pulling the pastor card” in order to control her.

“I finally left his church when, as an adult in my thirties, I was told I had to have his permission to have people over to my house and he was in control of the guest list.” This was in his role as her pastor, not her father.

Grace’s story is only one of many that I hope to introduce you to over the next few posts. An entire life from babyhood into middle adulthood can hardly be summed up in this short article, but I have tried to include some of the most powerful stories that Grace shared about what it was like to grow up in this environment, virtually brainwashed by the isolation and involvement in such a group.

(To be continued)

Children Raised Under Spiritual Abuse
Children Raised Under Spiritual Abuse II
Children Raised Under Spiritual Abuse III
Children Raised Under Spiritual Abuse IV
Children Raised Under Spiritual Abuse V

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

Spiritual Abuse as Trauma (Part 2)

Defining the different types of abuse seems unnecessary, but there are many people who do not know what constitutes abuse of another.

The golden rule, “do unto others as you’d have them do unto you” just doesn’t seem to be enough to enable human beings to learn how to treat one another. Although there are multiple reasons for this, the most simplistic response is to say that many people have been so misused themselves that they have little frame of reference as to how to treat themselves or one another. There is a saying I hear often, but do not know who to credit. It says “Hurt people hurt people.” In my line of work, I have observed that to be true. Usually, a cycle of abuse may be several generations long.

Since I work in the state of Arkansas, I have chosen to use some definitions that are handed out in that state. The Arkansas Legal Services Partnership defines emotional abuse as “behavior that undermines the other partner’s sense of self-worth.” It further defines psychological abuse as “isolating a partner from friends and family, and causing fear by intimidation and threats.”

As expected, there is no definition listed for spiritual abuse. However, many of the individuals who have experienced spiritual abuse could place their experiences quite literally in either of the above-mentioned definitions.

When a person leaves a spiritually abusive environment, it is often difficult to know how to act in the real world. The individual’s sense of self worth was so wrapped up in what they did for the church or in the identity of wearing certain clothing styles, that there is a transition period of time where they feel like they are a “nobody,” or completely irrelevant. A process of healing must begin, where they can begin to discover that they still have a lot to offer and that they are important just by being themselves.

Many abusive church groups isolate their members from friends and family who are “unsaved.” Oftentimes, members are forbidden from visiting other churches, going to ballgames, theaters, or other places of entertainment where one might normally spend time with family or friends. Not only that, many are told specifically that it doesn’t matter if their family drove across the United States to see them or not, they must tell visiting family members to either come to church with them, or they must leave the visiting family members at home alone, in order to not miss a single service at the church. There are specific things members are told not to discuss with family members, in some cases. In other cases, they are told to not talk to or associate with family members or friends who leave the group. If they have non-group members that are friends, the activities and the time they spend with those friends is limited. If members are spending time with non-members at all, it is expected that they will be endeavoring to convert them.  This type of isolation has the effect of adding to the “brainwashing” effect of the group.

Fear and threats are levied to intimidate individuals to obey the rules of the group. Perhaps the greatest threat is being removed from any type of service or leadership for not “following the rules” or “toeing the line.” In some cases, this gets so extreme that a person is not allowed to be an usher because they watched a movie at a friend’s home, if movies are against the rules. In another case, it might be that they are not allowed to sing in the choir because they have a two inch split in their long skirt. Some pastors preach that young people have to have pastoral permission to date one another. Even when they start dating, they cannot ever go to a restaurant or to any venue alone, but always with a chaperone. In addition to these rules, they cannot hold hands, hug, or kiss at all until at their wedding. These rules are enforced by threats and intimidation. If you do not follow these guidelines, you will be “in rebellion” to the “man of God” placed over you, and you will go to a “devil’s hell” for your rebellious spirit. In the meantime, you will be shamed and shunned within the church group.  If you are not a rule-follower, you will be banned from dating those who are rule-followers.

Do we need an additional title of “spiritual abuse” in order to recognize these behaviors for the abusiveness they are? I think not.  The very fact that these methods are designed to control another person and limit their contact with those outside the group should be cause for concern.

In a nutshell, abuse is taking someone’s power away. Stepping into another person’s life to command it is not only controlling, but it is abusive.

Spiritual Abuse as Trauma (Part 1)

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

What made Jesus mad?

It wasn’t the sinners. No, he ate dinner with them. What we see Jesus fighting against are the religious Pharisees who loved to point fingers at other people’s sin and shortcomings. Legalism. It is essentially the world system telling you that salvation is not a free gift and that you must work for your grace. Grace is a free gift. If it comes with ‘requirements’ is is no longer a gift, but a paycheck. Jesus came to save the world not condemn it. A lot of these issues come from people trying to make the Bible fit their opinions. They refuse to research culture, translations, Hebrew, Greek, etc.. They fall under the influence of the adversary and believe we are not worthy of God’s acceptance unless we perform. God loves you; you have to switch your focus from you and onto what He did (and is) doing for us. By saying a dress, long hair, no jewelry, and no makeup is required to get into Heaven, you have rejected the power of Jesus dying and resurrecting by saying – No God, I think I got this. No thanks, I can save myself. However, it isn’t about us. It is all about HIM and what HE did for us.

It. Is. That. Simple.That is the GOOD NEWS!

Let’s take a look at the scriptures and see what they say.

In Matthew 23:27, Jesus addressed the Pharisees who were being judgmental and holding on to a ‘visual and works-based’ salvation by saying, “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs, which appear beautiful on the outside, but inside are full of dead men’s bones and every impurity. In the same way, on the outside you seem righteous to people, but inside you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.” This statement was radical then and it still is today! What good is it if we visually look ‘set apart’ but we are bitter, prideful, and show no love? That is what Jesus means by a  whitewashed tomb! Jesus also declares the Pharisees hypocrites for straining out a gnat but eating a camel (Matt. 23:24). This was a parable about worrying about small things but yet, you are full of hatred and pride – which are BIG issues. We must cleans our hearts. As we do this, we will reflect Christ on the outside by our actions. We are becoming love. It isn’t a checklist, it is a process; one that can take years as we begin to heal the many layers of shame, guilt, and pain that we have endured. We must have faith. Believing in something we cannot….see.

We tend to think of a Pharisee as just a Jewish person who didn’t accept Jesus as the Messiah. Why did they reject Him? Jesus was viewed as radical. His message was a 360 from the Law of Moses (Read the book of Leviticus). Moses taught you must perform a certain way to be clean. Jesus taught that God already sees us as clean and we will have eternal life if we accept Him into our hearts as our Lord and Savior. There are many more accounts recorded in the New Testament where Jesus denounced the religious hypocrites, but I would like to now focus on the gospel. The good news. We cannot follow something we do not….know. The good news is that God already loves us and he loves us with agape love. Agape love is unconditional love. Meaning, there are no conditions in which we can make God love us more or less. He loves us because He is love. Scripture tells us this.

1 John 4:8 “The one who does not love does not know God, because God is love.”

Romans 8:39 tells us that nothing can separate us from love. Nothing. Not your skirt that is above your knees, your short hair, your bitterness, your lies….NOTHING. It is written, “(No) height or depth, or any other created thing will have the power to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord!” Praise God for that because it is impossible to be sinless, but fear not! We are loved by God and we have been bought and paid for.

John 17:23 “I am in them and You are in Me. May they be made completely one, so the world may know You have sent Me and have loved them as You have loved Me.” This right here tells us we are loved the same way Jesus is loved. Hallelujah!

Ephesians 1:7-8 “We have redemption in Him through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace that He lavished on us with all wisdom and understanding.” He has redeemed us! We are set free.

1 Corinthians 12:13 “For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free—and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.” God does not see a sinner when He looks at us. We have been baptized into Christ.

While we have this good news, so many people reject it. It is difficult for the human mind to grasp this concept that we are loved unconditionally by God. Another argument I have heard time and time again is that the God of the Old Testament was mean and full of wrath. Yes, people were killed, but the Bible is not a book of condemnation, it is a book about God’s redemption plan to save mankind after the fall. The only reason people were wiped away was due to their motives to wipe out the line to Jesus Christ. God had to preserve that at all costs because Jesus is the ONLY way to eternal life without pain and suffering.

If God was mad at us, why did he make a promise to Abraham that he would use his seed to bless the world? God made this promise in the very first book of the Bible. He wouldn’t do this if He regretted creating us. He promised Abraham, Issac, and Jacob (Israel) that He would redeem us through their bloodline. We now know that redemption plan was finished with Jesus Christ. The adversary tricked Adam and Eve to eat from the Tree of Good and Evil by making them feel God was hiding something from them. After the fall, they felt shame and guilt. Something God never wanted for us. The reason we felt naked was because of the enemy. Not God. We clothe ourselves to hide shame. If it was Satan who told us we were unclean in the garden, is it not Satan who is inside your head telling you that you are unclean if you don’t perform or wear certain types of attire?

One last thought. Fear in Hebrew does not translate to being scared. To fear God in the original text means to have childlike wonder and awe of God. Fear = awe. How easily we can get tricked into thinking God is angry with us. Satan has done this since the fall. The devil is the father of all lies and he knows no new tricks.

The good news is that the battle has been won. Jesus conquered the grave. We have redemption through Jesus Christ and we are covered by the blood of the lamb. Stop listening to the lies of the enemy. Read the word for yourself, rather than believing everything another human tells you. You can even question me and what I have written here in this article. Actually, I encourage you to. Seek to find the truth! The Holy Spirit will slowly reveal it if you ask for it.

We are no longer slaves. Thank you Jesus for this unconditional, undeserved gift of grace and eternal life.

Let your Kingdom come. Your will be done on earth as is it in Heaven. Until you return, I will praise You and spread this wonderful, life-giving news of how You died for me, and…..the world.  I pray that every person who reads this will be filled with a seed of Truth. In Jesus’ name I declare this. Amen.

–GodIsLove

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

The Pharisees and Apostolics Part 3

This is a continuation from Part 2. Thoughts are based off the article, Are Apostolics Pharisees? written by Gary R. Trzcinski, which appeared in the September 1996 Pentecostal Herald (now called Pentecostal Life, the official magazine of the United Pentecostal Church) which addressed the issue of whether Apostolics (Oneness Pentecostals) were Pharisees. The author gave 29 points as to why they were not.

Below is an excerpt:

Pharisees never criticized Jesus or His disciples for their physical appearance (hair, modesty, ornamentation). We do not find one verse of Scripture where they ever condemned Jesus and His followers for the way they looked. Many Pharisees were waiting to find one flaw in Jesus so that they could discredit Him and His teachings. If there would have been something wrong, the Pharisees would have found it. But they found nothing. Why? Because there was nothing to find, nothing to criticize.

The Pharisees were somewhat holy looking on the outside but extremely unholy in their hearts. However, Jesus was holy both inside and out. He was the perfect man. “Let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God” (2 Corinthians 7:1).

Why is it that the Pharisees didn’t criticize their appearance? This argument actually works against what the author has stated about being different from ‘the world.’ If Jesus and the disciples looked distinctly different from ‘the world,’ as the UPC teaches we in North America must do today, then would they not have pointed this out? It is somewhat misleading to state they were looking for one flaw as they pointed out several in Jesus and his disciples. They took note that Jesus ate and spent time with sinners, they reprimanded them for eating with unwashed hands and said Jesus was gluttonous and a winebibber…so would they not have made note of any appearance which stood out from those around them? Could it be that Jesus and his followers appeared like ‘the world’? Or are we to believe there was a difference in the definition of ‘the world’ some 2000 years ago?

By mentioning “hair, modesty, ornamentation” the author appears to want readers to link this to standards taught in the UPCI, as if they were being followed by Jesus and his disciples. Yet not once do we read that Jesus taught against jewelry, make-up, cutting hair and so forth. He was silent on such issues that the UPCI feels are extremely important. Similarly, Jesus did not teach or follow the rules which the Pharisees added to the law.

The Pharisees were somewhat holy looking on the outside but extremely unholy in their hearts.” Actually, they weren’t just somewhat…Jesus said that they made clean the outside of the cup and platter. Anyone can make themselves look good to others in this manner.  Consider that the heart of the Pharisee wasn’t really toward God and Jesus pronounced them dead on the inside, yet they were able to present to others the image of a sparkling clean and holy exterior, one they thought would cause people to be envious and look up to them.

Pharisees only cleansed the outward appearance but neglected the sinful human heart. They were righteous on the outside but evil on the inside. They were hypocrites (Matthew 23:25-28); but we abhor hypocrisy. Apostolics seek to clean not only the outward appearance but also the heart, mind, and human spirit. Jesus asserted: “Cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also” (Matthew 23:26). A cleansing of the inside will eventually lead to a cleansing of the outside.

The vast majority of our preaching and efforts center on the redemption of the soul. And yet we would be hypocrites if we willfully neglected those passages of Scripture pertaining to cleansing the outward appearance (1 Corinthians 11:4-16; 1 Timothy 2:9-10; 1 Peter 3:3-4). We follow the admonition of Paul to abstain from all appearance of evil so that we would be sanctified wholly- spirit, soul, and body (1 Thessalonians 5:22-23).

If the inside is clean, then it cannot help but show outwardly–and not simply in our appearance, but more importantly in our actions. This is the work of the Holy Spirit in the believer’s life. This is part of the problem in performance oriented churches- they cause people to believe that they must work to make themselves holy and acceptable to God. Don’t cut your hair or wear jewelry and make-up, be sure dresses and skirts fall below the knees, watch your sleeve length and maybe you will be pleasing to God and accepted. Yet the book of Galatians makes it extremely clear that our righteousness will never come from our own works, but it is by faith in Jesus that we are made righteous in the sight of God. If the law was only to act as a guardian until Jesus came, why would we now need any other set of laws to ‘protect’ us or act as a fence to keep us safe? Think about it. Written laws do not change the person. The Old Testament law did not make the people righteous by obeying it as they were not changed on the inside. No list of rules is going to change us either, no matter how good the intentions.

The author claims that Apostolics “abhor hypocrisy” and yet most of us who have been part of them have seen it in multiple ways. There were the ministers that taught against television and owned one themselves or would otherwise have ways to watch it. They teach women’s hair is to be uncut yet some women hide their trimmed hair by wearing it up. They teach against jewelry but wear similar ornamentation in their hair or on their shoes. In some of their churches men are taught they must be clean shaven but the rule can be temporarily bypassed for those who participate in a Christmas or Easter play. How many times have you heard a minister proclaim how people can shout at a sporting event (some are against attending these) and then compare that to how one is to act in a church service? What about the sermons which state smoking is defiling the temple of the Holy Spirit and yet they ignore where the Bible actually speaks against gluttony? These are just a few of the ways in which hypocrisy has been seen in their midst.

I will close with the thoughts of a friend:

You know, as I think about this, it’s not so much the grace thing, as is the need to have something that can be seen. It’s easier to trust in that which can be seen, it is easier to maintain control over what can be seen. When one is seen doing all that is required, then the pastor can rest assured that he has control over that person. When the standards are broken, then the pastor knows for sure that that person needs reprimanding, and many are quite willing to join in on the flogging! I’ve seen this first hand in my former church, especially with the young people.

It’s harder to let go of the reins and let the spirit have his way. Those in control feel that they must be enforcing something or some kind of rule, etc. I think it comes down to more of a trust issue for many in UPC, afraid to trust in that which can’t be seen, unless there is evidence through obedience.

The Pharisees and Apostolics Part 1

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

The Pharisees and Apostolics Part 2

This is a continuation from Part 1.  Thoughts are based off the article, Are Apostolics Pharisees? written by Gary R. Trzcinski, which appeared in the September 1996 Pentecostal Herald (now called Pentecostal Life, the official magazine of the United Pentecostal Church) which addressed the issue of whether Apostolics (Oneness Pentecostals) were Pharisees. The author gave 29 points as to why they were not.

Below is a quote from the article:

Pharisees placed their own man-made traditions above the commandments of God (Matthew 15:2-9). Some traditions may occasionally serve a good purpose but may also at times interfere with the plan of God (Matthew 15:1-2). Other traditions are evil because they are worldly: “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.” (Colossians 2:8). Still other traditions are good because they are biblical: “Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle” (2 Thessalonians 2:15).

Apostolics have truly endeavored to teach and practice those traditions found in the Word of God. Critics may disagree with us concerning our understanding of modesty, for example, and call it human tradition, but Apostolics are making a sincere effort to practice modesty in spite of the world’s traditions.

Our critics, on the other hand, often look no different than the world. Maybe they have chosen to ignore the scriptural principles of modest dress. Or maybe their definition of modesty is not much different from the world’s definition. Evidently, they have ignorantly or willingly chosen to follow the worldly traditions of fallen humanity.

It would have been better for him to use the word modest or immodest as compared to worldly or the world. This thinking about ‘the world’ has been carried to extremes. People use many things which are of ‘the world’ such as houses, cars, toothbrushes, banks, electricity, and so forth—so are we to refrain from *everything* worldly? This is what they try to teach concerning dress and a few other things, but they are inconsistent with its application.

With all the varying cultures, it would be pretty impossible to dress in a manner in which everyone would give 100% approval. For instance, while the UPC women may wear long dresses or skirts, they wear various bright colors. To an Amish woman, this would be improper. How the Amish woman dresses would be immodest to a woman in a strict Islamic group.

It is interesting to note that the missionaries of the UPCI are told not to attempt to change the culture of the countries to which they are sent. (In fact, I have heard that the UPC in other countries is different than here in North America in that they don’t have all the same prohibitions.) Yet in North America where the organization is headquartered, they attempt to do the opposite by teaching things contrary to our culture. While pants are culturally acceptable for women to wear, they teach women are not to wear them.

Apostolics have truly endeavored to teach and practice those traditions found in the Word of God. Critics may disagree with us concerning our understanding of modesty, for example, and call it human tradition, but Apostolics are making a sincere effort to practice modesty in spite of the world’s traditions.” All Christians should be modest. But where the UPC goes wrong is they attempt to define for everyone what is and is not considered modest and then claim these things are biblical. Worse yet, their own ministers and churches cannot agree on what is modest or acceptable.

Visit one of their churches and they teach that sleeves must be to the wrist, while another will teach somewhere else on the arm. While one church will proclaim that a woman cutting her hair could put her in jeopardy of hell, another does not. One church teaches men are to be clean shaven and the next allows facial hair. One church teaches you may wear a wedding ring and the one in the next town forbids it. They try to wiggle around these inconsistencies by claiming each pastor has the authority to set the standards in their church as they see fit. Yet if what they teach is truly “those traditions found in the Word of God,” then why would there be all these differences between their churches? Claiming these outward standards are based on traditions found in the Bible is incorrect. We find no Scriptures giving specifics on sleeve length, no prohibition against jewelry or make-up, or pants on women, etc., yet we are to believe that all they teach is spelled out in the Bible.

Our critics, on the other hand, often look no different than the world. Maybe they have chosen to ignore the scriptural principles of modest dress.” Note the assumption made by the author. If you don’t see it as they do, then you’ve chosen to ignore what the Bible clearly teaches and of course you must be dressing immodestly. Then those who disagree are linked to ‘the world.’ I will point out again that their men often look no different than men in ‘the world.’ Where in Scripture is it taught that in dress Christians must look different from those around us? I don’t see any mention where Jesus or the disciples dressed any differently from the other people. Nor do we read something like, “And the people of Galatia immediately knew they were Christians because they dressed in a much different manner than the people who did not know Christ.” If there were such a difference in how Jesus dressed, Judas wouldn’t have needed to point him out as he did when he betrayed him, but would have explained how they would recognize him by the difference in his attire.

Or maybe their definition of modesty is not much different from the world’s definition. Evidently, they have ignorantly or willingly chosen to follow the worldly traditions of fallen humanity.” Here is yet another negative assumption. It is interesting how it must be one or the other and not that some may simply view the issue differently than they do.

The Handbook of Life in Bible Times by J.A. Thompson states, “For all their piety, they placed great burdens of religious obligation on the ordinary people. They had lost the spirit of the law and turned devotion into a system. God became to them almost a machine, bound to bless the person who carried out the right rituals at the right time. Jesus’ concept of God, however, was of a loving Father who cared for people and provided for their needs, and who asked to be loved and obeyed from the heart and not simply to be recognized by outward and often empty ritual.” The name Pharisees implies ‘the separated ones.’ They wanted to be noticed when they prayed and wanted the best seats in the synagogue and at banquets. They made sure to look somewhat different (by broadening their phylacteries and lengthening their tassels) so they would stand out and be noticed. Jesus taught against them and told the people to beware of their teachings. He said they placed heavy burdens upon people. They defined God’s laws, when God did not state those things, such as dictating what constituted work on the Sabbath and what didn’t. Don’t these things sound like what the United Pentecostal Church has done?

The Pharisees and Apostolics Part 3

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

Click to access the login or register cheese
YouTube
YouTube
Set Youtube Channel ID
x  Powerful Protection for WordPress, from Shield Security
This Site Is Protected By
ShieldPRO