I am an apostolic christian, and i am studying in a school where our school uniforms are pants. what i did was i ask my local Pastor for a letter and i give it to our dean and they approved it. THANKYOU LORD GOD WILL ALWAYS MAKE A WAY
There are pants designed for women not necessarily you are using men clothing when wearing pants. However, if you do not feel comfortable then ok, find a way but this do not define your holiness
At my job interview, I was told I would have to wear pants. Even though I would be working in a hospital clerical position. There would be no safety violations. I was very polite but I told them. It was non-negotiable. That it was a religious conviction. They hired me, and I have been there eight years now. Sometimes, we just need to politely say no. Really appreciate these podcasts
When my wife was younger in high school she tried to get a job but they denied her because of her dress but when her mom when up there and pressed the religious aspect and they can't discriminate bases on that she got the job
God doesn't look at the outward appearance , He looks @ the heart!!.. I was raised up in an apostolic church!! I know people who look the part in the dress code of "Apostolicism" but were full of the devil on the inside!!! Of course dress modestly - that goes without saying!!! But what you wear does not save you!!! Only the blood of Jesus saves!!!!! "Church" doctrine should never be above scripture!!!!
There is no true Scriptural basis for declaring that it is a sin for girls and women to wear pants . I respect girls and women who choose not to wear pants , but I cannot accept a declaration that it is a sin for them to wear pants .
It’s about modesty which is biblical pants show a lot of a girls body and sometimes a guys if there tight fitting as leggings go they show a lot of that part of a girls body and sweat pants if they fit tight so do they. As Brother Bernard said
We have to stop teaching that holiness standards set by the UPCI are biblical. Yes, dress modestly but that doesn’t mean women wear dresses / skirts everyday . You just said, “ this is our religion convictions “ every one doesn’t have that conviction . Most of the time it is pushed and people who wear pants are overlooked and looked as sinners . Plus, T-Shirts , tennis shoes , and basketball hats etc were originally made for men . These standards has caused judgments against people walk with Lord to be prevented from serving . These pastors will have to answer .. because it’s judging without judging Righteously! The holiness standards are silly . You can wear nail polish but not a bright color , you can wear makeup but light make up , however, you can wear different colored clothing etc . Preach in a suite etc . Men can wear shorts and women can’t . Women can wear pajamas but only in the house etc . You can wear a beard but only during vacation etc . These are Pharisee type ways . The Lord is coming back for the church , not a particular denomination. God bless ❤️
1 Samuel 16:7......man looks on the outward appearance but God looks on the heart (KJV) Someone can be covered from the top of their head and all the way down to their toes but if their heart is not right, it's all about a heart relationship with Jesus Christ!
The UPCI has built its house on literal articles of clothing (skirts vs pants), rather than masculinity vs femininity. Scripture does not condemn women from wearing pants at all, but it speaks against appearing as a man. Culture can clearly tell the difference between a woman wearing women’s pants or men’s pants (looser). If the UPCI wanted to apply this literal approach evenly to life (instead of just this thin application to pants and skirts), they would also condemn women wearing their boyfriend or husband’s hoodies (undeniably masculine articles of clothing). They would also not be okay with women wearing any form of pants indoors, because the Bible does not say “it’s okay to sin behind private doors, but not in public sight.”
According to UPCI the “clean shaven” rule was implemented in the 60s in order to be distinguishable from hippies. Thankfully most churches are ok with beards now, and I wouldn’t attend one that wasn’t. The scripture commonly used to defend this rule is “do not offend your brother.” This scripture is taken to an extreme level, and no one’s salvation should be affected by a beard. It’s as stupid as saying I’m offended by the color shirt you wear. The extreme conservative churches are usually the only ones offended by beards, and they are in a shrinking minority. I’d say within 10 years beards will no longer be an issue within the organization.
I was raised UPC and the realization that male facial hair was not a sin didn't occur to me until my early 30's. I'm not very observant and therefore a slow learner. At that time I finally came to realize that a beard was always, during both Old and New Testament periods, a symbol of masculinity even by Godly people, not just the worldly. Thankfully the U.P.C. eventually came back around to a more Biblical view on beards. As mentioned in one of the comments above, that "standard" was not even implemented until the 1960s. I remember the cover of an Apostolic/UPC magazine that presented a lengthy article by Bro. Bernard on the history of the Apostolic re-awakening that occurred in the early 1900's. The cover of the magazine, as well as the interior article, had photos of many of the men who were members of that early revival and almost all, if not all of them, had long beards. And those were obviously very Godly men absolutely full of the Holy Spirit as evidenced by their frequent and unquestionably miraculous answers to prayer. That pretty much confirmed for me what I had recently come to think about the issue of facial hair. Furthermore, it also revealed to me Bro. Bernard's understanding on the subject since those heavily bearded photos were so prominently displayed throughout that issue of the magazine. I was privileged to meet Bro. Bernard when he was a young man in Law School at U.T.. His wife is a personal friend of my family that I have known since childhood. When I lived in Austin I attended the congregation where Brother, (Doctor), Bernard was pastor. When his sons became young adults, at least one of them, (perhaps both), had a beard and he was on the platform as part of the music/worship team. One of the ushers had also a thick mustache. That was further evidence, without having to ask, that Pastor Bernard himself didn't not teach against men's facial hair as was common for a few decades in the UPC. I also realized that Paul taught in GREAT detail about people's PERSONAL convictions. According to Paul, many people's personal convictions are thought by them to be actual rules or standards from God though they are not. As long as those personal convictions are not some form of sin, Paul teaches to NOT try and teach people away from those convictions, that since they believe so strongly in those convictions it would be literal SIN for them to violate them. Paul implies that even when someone's personal conviction is NOT a rule of God, that person has unwittingly given himself to God in a more personal/special way and they must now KEEP those convictions. The REAL surprise to me is how Paul goes on to say that when we attempt to teach someone away from their personal convictions, not only would we cause THEM to sin, but we would be sinning OURSELVES in doing so. I get the idea that a person's personal convictions are akin to the Old Testament Nazarite vow, though without intending for it to be so. The Nazarite vow, with it's ADDED levels of holiness above what the standard Israelite was commanded to adhere to, was voluntary, not a command of God. But once the Nazarite vow was made, though voluntary, it was absolutely a sin to NOT keep the higher than prescribed standards of holiness. That to ME says that if someone still believes it's a sin for a man to have facial hair, I should not attempt to teach them "away" from that belief. If that person ASKS me to explain why I believe facial hair is NOT a sin, then I am free to give him my perspective, still taking care to not to tell him his conviction is wrong.
If the school is a public school then they must respect your right to religious freedom. In Canada even private schools and work places must respect your right to religious freedom due to being regulated by at least the province if not the federal government. The fall under the Human Rights code at the provincial or federal level.
Gender distinction is important but so much discussion over hair and pants is ridiculous...and it's almost always centered around what women can and can't wear. I'm far from a feminist but that sounds like misogyny to me. Women in pants isn't masculine. There are short hair styles for women that are feminine. I see Scottish men in kilts and I don't see them as less masculine although I could never. Times change. Fashion changes. Culture changes. All change isn't contrary to God's will.
Inward holiness produces outward holiness. If you study the history of when women started wearing pants, you’ll have a better understanding. I’m not dressing modest to be saved, I’m dressing modest because I’m saved.. it’s a product of my salvation. Take for example, tithes and offering, we don’t give to be saved, we give because we are saved. Faith produces fruit!
Bro. Bernard, I hope you will read this question and give me some kind of answer. I have wondered about this for some time, but I have not received any kind of satisfactory answer. The snogas are pants with a skirt sewn on. Yet, we don't believe in wearing pants. So, why is it that so many apostolic women and girls wear these? I know one of the websites you gave is snoga. I am in no way wanting to bash anyone or anything like that. I just truly want to know for myself. Thank you.
I heard another preacher who suggested that an apostolic woman should not accept a job that requires her to wear pants and compromise her beliefs. So glad for this subject to be discussed.
but bible talks about identity. So woman does not identify as man by wearing clothing not for woman. However, there are pants for woman, as long as holiness comes from the heart to the outside not the other way around
Then becomes like pharisees and this legalism. Holiness is not legalism. Is not to do whatever we want but at same time forcing people to do so is not holiness. BTW when Paul wrote a letter of women do not cut the hair, women cut their hair when worship Diana but when they became Christ follower told them to cover the head or let the hair grow just to make a difference that no longer worship a pagan god.
No. Clothes is cultural and human made. For example Scottish men wear kilts, and Arabs wear robes. Bottom line is make sure you wear clothes that is modest, and is designed for your gender. Scripture tells us to not wear our opposite genders clothes, meaning make sure we are identifiable as a man or woman. I personally don’t believe that a woman must only wear a skirt, and a man can only wear pants. As long as you are identifiable as a man or woman within your culture, and you are modest.
It's really a matter of obeying God and his conviction. If people are obeying man instead of God then there's a problem. If God brings conviction then that's foundational. If man brings conviction then it's sand
Would sin keep you from entering into the Kingdom of God? Of course. Then it is an issue isn't it? But they never will say exactly just let God convict you. Convict you of what? Not to sin so you can enter in? That is what is being said here without really saying it. Which means that if a woman isn't dressed in skirts they aren't making it in, because they are not living a sanctified/holy life. Which means not too many women, starting from the early 1900s, are not making it in. Again, that is what they are saying without saying it
I commented on a similar question earlier but here it is again if anuone is interested in the expanded version. Ha! I, a woman, was on active duty with the Air Force when I was baptized in Jesus name and filled with the Holy Ghost. Praise God! For the most part, my job afforded me the ability to wear "blues" and I opted to wear the skirt. At times, during training exercises for example, I had to wear what we called back then, "fatigues" - the green uniform with pants. It was an infrequent duty requirement for me so I complied, and I believe the grace of God covered it since I made the commitment to the military before I got in the church. The military is different from a regular job - I couldn't just quit. However, bc of my God-given conviction around modest apparel, I made the decision to separate at the end of the enlistment. I stopped wearing pants off-duty when the Lord convicted me about it. I hope this helps someone.
Nothing, and if someone says something, they should never speak beyond it being noted as "possible slim but possible vanity." But, so is that nice car you drive.
Anyone judges someone by their clothes as long as clean and respectful in my opinion is down right wrong We're not in presence of God because what we wear It's our hearts and love for our Lord God
My brother who designated pants as a man clothing, when historical what they used to wear evidently in the old testament was robes or tunic, male and female wore basically the same garment with the women clothing being distinguished by embroidery or design. Who designated pants solely as a man garment man or God.
@@pepchep but there are pants designed for women they dont use men pant. For me is more legalism. There are sisters at churches that uses very tight dresses, very expensive garment, etc. Does this make them holy? of course not all apostolics are pharisees.
You’d be surprised how many ladies wear pj’s pants at home to sleep in...Also back in the days men wore gowns to sleep in...Clothes is Clothes just material...
I remember this older Apostolic lady telling my mom that she only sleeps in gowns because she doesn't want to get left behind if Jesus returns at night and she's wearing pajama pants. I was just a kid, but I remember thinking that doesn't make any sense because Jesus can return when you're in the middle of getting dressed. I imagined her quickly getting dressed every day, just in case, and I felt bad her. She was probably terrified to shower and use the restroom also 🤷🏽♀️
Thank You! You've earned plenty of respect and your authority is without question.... My unqualified and unsolicited comments are for the sake of stimulating discussion that may help provide useful feedback... So,..... I disagree that the Bible specifically or even vaguely suggests that the exact design/style of clothing we call 'pants' pertains to men only. Like suits and ties (which only promote class distinction and elitist vanity), pants are a modern worldly tradition of men that's been slowly fading away since the early 1900s. I suggest that if a woman wears a modern design of clothing similar to traditional men's pants, but made exclusively for women, it doesn't violate Biblical scripture. Such a design would need to be modest (not tight fitting and not overly adorned). Culottes are one such design. Does any man still insist these are manly? If so, I invite any one of you to wear a pair to church some day! There's only one God!.... so there's only one holiness! God's holiness! 100% total and absolute separation from all sin!... Every day!... All day!... In every possible way!... Biblically (in the NT) there's no such thing as 'outward holiness'. There's only outward UNholiness. So-called 'outward holiness' is an oxymoron simply because our own righteousness, especially any outward displays using clothing, is like filthy rags! HOWEVER........ do I think the UPCI (or any other organization) should change? ABSOLUTELY NOT!..... Why? Because it's part of the traditional 'holiness movement' that started when only men wore pants. It's an important part of original Pentecostalism that began in the early 1900s. It's part of the UPCI identity and should remain that way as long as possible. Removing such an integrated tradition now could weaken the UPCI in ways we don't want to imagine or deal with. My concern is insisting that specific clothing styles (like pants, which are only 'traditions of men') are actually in the Bible when they're not. There's no need to promote the false concept of 'outward holiness' just to make it seem Biblical. It's in error to keep referring to ANY styles of clothing as holy. At best, you could make a case for certain robe styles in the Torah, especially for the priesthood, but that's about it. Unless you're Jewish, no modern clothes should be considered holy. Not here on earth. Certainly, it's already well within your existing Biblical authority to simply formalize and incorporate a dress code. Why not just do that?.... and.... Call it what it really is..... A DRESS CODE! May the spirit of the One God (revealed, expressed, and manifest through Jesus the Christ) lead us and guide us into all truth! ps..... What ever happened to the futuristic idea from the 'space race' visionaries of the 1950s and 60s that everyone would be wearing shiny silver unisex jumpsuits by the year 2000? I always thought they were kinda 'cool' looking when I was a kid. But I suppose we all dodged a bullet with that one! 😁
Before the feminist movement all realized dresses were women's clothes.. not Christians but everyone.. we should not change with society but stand out as holy..'be ye holy for I am holy ' and we are to be a separated people... however if you want to wear culottes... wear them..I wouldn't but bc I think they are ugly.. so not sure why you felt this needed saying
@@Karen-ur6mm Thanks for your reply........'be ye holy for I am holy ' ..... Is God holy because of his outward appearance and what he wears? To even suggest that any clothes are the least bit holy or can somehow properly display or express holiness in any way, shape, or form is 100% pure vanity and idolatry. Holiness can never be expressed through clothing. Only sin can be expressed through clothing (immodest or wrong gender distinction). God's holiness is 100% absolute separation from ALL sin! Every day! All day! In every way! God's holiness has nothing to do with clothing or outward appearance in any way! But that doesn't stop practically EVERY religion from using some type of costume or special clothing in a foolish attempt to look holy. The pope's pointy hats. Fancy robes with crosses imprinted. Jewish phylacteries. Nowadays.... worldly suits and ties with shaved faces. It's all selfish pride and vanity (and vexation of spirit). It has nothing to do with Biblical holiness. Zero! You display holiness only by God's spirit and separation from the sins of 'the world'. If someone really wants to look holy......... perhaps they should try wearing "sackcloth and ashes" for a while. The most popular outward expression of inner humility and repentance found in the Bible. It's the closest thing to expressing any 'outward holiness' using clothing that you'll find. Has true Biblical holiness (separation from sin) become nothing more than wearing certain clothing styles and making certain fashion statements? What a shameful display of filthy UNholy unrighteous rags! Adam and Eve's use of a fig leaf didn't really cover their shame. Neither will 'Pentecostal' style clothing cover anyone's shame! Thanks again!...... and NO!...... I would never wear culottes (a women's style of pants)...... That would be an UNholy display of sin!..... Why?..... Because I'm a man. I suppose I could wear a man's skirt (Scottish kilt). It was once a masculine distinction for men who went to war. It proudly identified their clan. Though technically, a 'kilt' is more of a wrap, it still looks like a woman's skirt. In the modern society where I live, a skirt is still exclusively a women's style of clothing....... Thank God! 😇
I was on active duty with the Air Force when I was born again. At times, the military uniform requirements conflicted with my Apostolic beliefs. Since I made a commitment to serve my country before I got in the church, I did (wore) what was required for the remainder of my enlistment but separated from active duty when that enlistment was up.
Love Bro. Bernard, however, he mentions, orthodox Jews, Muslims, mennonites, and Amish in regards to apparel however, he does leave out the God-given distinction of the man’s beard that each of these religious entities hold to. The early Pentecostal movement was filled with *manly men with God-given facial distinction.
The bible recorded that the was first garment that was created was created by God in the book of Genesis, and also the bible name those Garments " Genesis 3 vs 21- King James Bible Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them. Question: where in the bible does it says that pants is solely a man garment? did God name a man garment Pants? Historical the isarelites wore robes, the bible record jesus wearing a tunic, the male and female Garments Historically among ancient isarelites were basically same with differences in kinds pertaining to style and embroidery. Amongst a few bible version translations the NasB is amongst them that mis transalate Daniel 3 vs 27 by inserting trousers instead of robes or cloak, which what helps creates this confusion with pants amongst women and men, They translate a specific verse within the book of Daniel incorrectly which add to this confusion that a pants a is disgnated male garment... NASB 1995 Daniel 3 vs 27 The satraps, the prefects, the governors and the king’s high officials gathered around and saw in regard to these men that the fire had no effect on the bodies of these men nor was the hair of their head singed, nor were their trousers damaged, nor had the smell of fire even come upon them. Historically Garments that was worn back in the old testament was of the same kind with the difference in embroidery and designed which is what was used to determined the difference in male and female, however a man pants may be the same in kind but is distinguished in style embroidery or design, one can tell the difference by design or style a man pants and female. Through progression into adaptation came about pants which was originated in the 1500s, known at that time as trousers were mostly wore by men because women were primarily station in the home taking of children and the home, trouser was more suited to wear when riding horses and back in those it was men that primarily rode horses. So the question left unanswered who designated pants as a man's Garment? Pants could be designated female garment as well not because it was man whom first wore it, how can we be so certain it is a man's garment!? The bible is our guide book and it is no were to be found in the bible that pants is a designated male garment. If we put so much attention in Garments, why don't we wear robes and tunics? Cause none of the the isarelites,the 12 apostle,people in the new testament times or Even Jesus wore pants.
*James 1:27* *Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.* I live here, but I’m not from here. Nor do I want to look or sound like I’m from here. *Philippians 3:20* *For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ:* Where I’m from (and I’m just passing through here to get back to there), we have our *OWN SPEECH,* *Matthew 5:37* *But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.* Our *OWN DRESS,* Exodus 31:10* *and the cloths of service, and the holy garments for Aaron the priest, and the garments of his sons, to minister in the priest’s office,* *Exodus 35:19* *the cloths of service, to do service in the holy place, the holy garments for Aaron the priest, and the garments of his sons, to minister in the priest’s office.* *Revelation 19:8* *And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.* and our *OWN MUSIC. Ephesians 5:19* *speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord;* *Colossians 3:16* *Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.* I don’t want anything from here. I’ve rejected the things of this world, which in include their speech, dress and music which is all junk. My Father has far more superior things than what is being offered here. There is no comparison. 🇨🇦
Short story, what would Jesus say ? Cultures are different, the era of bible days are different . Jesus was a Jew and wore a beard, look up their customs. We gotta stop making everything sin❤
1 Timothy 2:9 says that "women should adorn themselves in modest apparel," but who decided that all pants are immodest? Pants can be modest or immodest and so can dresses and skirts. Deuteronomy 22:5 says that "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." Apostolic Pentecostals use this verse as another example of why women shouldn't wear pants, but pants are not the issue here. This verse is about identifying and presenting as the opposite gender, (i.e. transgenderism), which goes against God's design. If God wants men to only wear pants and women to only wear dresses and skirts, is it a sin for men to wear kilts or tunics? Sometimes it's a part of someone's culture. Those men are wearing men's clothing.
Laura Guerra joining in from little rock arkansas.I see people in church.u.p.c.I made the comment that the young lady that was up there doing praise and worship.if she was going to be in leadership.she should be in a dress.I see a lot of u.p.c minsters wife in pants that once taught mondist.holyness.love your books.its sure as changed God word doesn't . my self I will never take a job .if they said I would half to wear of pants.once I got into the church.
(1 Cor 6:12 KJV) All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any. According to the verse above, all things are lawful for those who are in Christ, but not all things are profitable. In other words, there are things that Christians do that will bring glory to the Lord and there are also things that Christians do that bring him shame. As long as Jesus is at the Father's Right Hand the time remains to confess any sins or wrong doings that may have brought shame to the Lord or to others. If a believer chooses not to deal with any of their wrong doings now in this time of mercy a d grace, then the Lord will have no choice but to deal with them at the JSOC in the future. (2 Cor 5:10-11)
![Diggy Graves - Red Vineyard [Official Lyric Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/8Ro085T0mnQ/mqdefault.jpg)
I am an apostolic christian, and i am studying in a school where our school uniforms are pants. what i did was i ask my local Pastor for a letter and i give it to our dean and they approved it. THANKYOU LORD GOD WILL ALWAYS MAKE A WAY
There are pants designed for women not necessarily you are using men clothing when wearing pants. However, if you do not feel comfortable then ok, find a way but this do not define your holiness
@@Fr4nkSanchezdon't be "tht guy".
At my job interview, I was told I would have to wear pants. Even though I would be working in a hospital clerical position. There would be no safety violations. I was very polite but I told them.
It was non-negotiable. That it was a religious conviction. They hired me, and I have been there eight years now. Sometimes, we just need to politely say no. Really appreciate these podcasts
This argument is us Christians majoring in the minor. The Bible advocates for gender distinction, not skirts vs. pants
Thank you, Bro. Benard for your Great insight and leadership.
I just have to say that as a woman I appreciate brother Bernard taking the time to actually list the sources where women can get skirts.
When my wife was younger in high school she tried to get a job but they denied her because of her dress but when her mom when up there and pressed the religious aspect and they can't discriminate bases on that she got the job
God doesn't look at the outward appearance , He looks @ the heart!!.. I was raised up in an apostolic church!! I know people who look the part in the dress code of "Apostolicism" but were full of the devil on the inside!!! Of course dress modestly - that goes without saying!!! But what you wear does not save you!!!
Only the blood of Jesus saves!!!!! "Church" doctrine should never be above scripture!!!!
Well yeah but that’s not what this video is about 😅
There is no true Scriptural basis for declaring that it is a sin for girls and women to wear pants . I respect girls and women who choose not to wear pants , but I cannot accept a declaration that it is a sin for them to wear pants .
It’s about modesty which is biblical pants show a lot of a girls body and sometimes a guys if there tight fitting as leggings go they show a lot of that part of a girls body and sweat pants if they fit tight so do they. As Brother Bernard said
@@Iceaberg17 which is also true for men.
@@tldillard3 stop trying to blur the lines.
If pants were modest on a woman, the world wouldn't have hundreds of songs worshipping the way a woman looks in tight pants. Get real.
@@tldillard3 my husband and I agree with you that some of the pants/suits that young men wear are too tight. It’s the newest fashion.
We have to stop teaching that holiness standards set by the UPCI are biblical.
Yes, dress modestly but that doesn’t mean women wear dresses / skirts everyday . You just said, “ this is our religion convictions “ every one doesn’t have that conviction .
Most of the time it is pushed and people who wear pants are overlooked and looked as sinners .
Plus, T-Shirts , tennis shoes , and basketball hats etc were originally made for men .
These standards has caused judgments against people walk with Lord to be prevented from serving .
These pastors will have to answer .. because it’s judging without judging Righteously!
The holiness standards are silly . You can wear nail polish but not a bright color , you can wear makeup but light make up , however, you can wear different colored clothing etc .
Preach in a suite etc . Men can wear shorts and women can’t .
Women can wear pajamas but only in the house etc .
You can wear a beard but only during vacation etc . These are Pharisee type ways .
The Lord is coming back for the church , not a particular denomination.
God bless ❤️
1 Samuel 16:7......man looks on the outward appearance but God looks on the heart (KJV) Someone can be covered from the top of their head and all the way down to their toes but if their heart is not right, it's all about a heart relationship with Jesus Christ!
The UPCI has built its house on literal articles of clothing (skirts vs pants), rather than masculinity vs femininity. Scripture does not condemn women from wearing pants at all, but it speaks against appearing as a man.
Culture can clearly tell the difference between a woman wearing women’s pants or men’s pants (looser).
If the UPCI wanted to apply this literal approach evenly to life (instead of just this thin application to pants and skirts), they would also condemn women wearing their boyfriend or husband’s hoodies (undeniably masculine articles of clothing). They would also not be okay with women wearing any form of pants indoors, because the Bible does not say “it’s okay to sin behind private doors, but not in public sight.”
It does
THANK YOU !!! Just silly thoughts, plus Jesus isn’t coming back just for apostolic people
What a blessing Dr. Bernard is to the body of Oneness believers
This should be, when dress codes conflicts with UPC bylaws & guidelines. Not all apostolic are in agreement with the UPC and others similar to them
If gender distinction is a priority in the upc why would they have a standard for a man to shave his face smooth like a woman?
According to UPCI the “clean shaven” rule was implemented in the 60s in order to be distinguishable from hippies.
Thankfully most churches are ok with beards now, and I wouldn’t attend one that wasn’t. The scripture commonly used to defend this rule is “do not offend your brother.” This scripture is taken to an extreme level, and no one’s salvation should be affected by a beard. It’s as stupid as saying I’m offended by the color shirt you wear.
The extreme conservative churches are usually the only ones offended by beards, and they are in a shrinking minority. I’d say within 10 years beards will no longer be an issue within the organization.
This is answered in a video on beards.
@@jcnash02 Yes, a fascinating video! Here's some of what I recall......
"BEARDS ARE UNHOLY!!!.... Why?.... Cuz WE say so!"...... 🧔♂ = 👿 = ☠ = ⬇
@@bluesfan6862 This means holiness changes over the time? Holiness comes from the heart to the outside not the otherway around
I was raised UPC and the realization that male facial hair was not a sin didn't occur to me until my early 30's. I'm not very observant and therefore a slow learner. At that time I finally came to realize that a beard was always, during both Old and New Testament periods, a symbol of masculinity even by Godly people, not just the worldly. Thankfully the U.P.C. eventually came back around to a more Biblical view on beards. As mentioned in one of the comments above, that "standard" was not even implemented until the 1960s.
I remember the cover of an Apostolic/UPC magazine that presented a lengthy article by Bro. Bernard on the history of the Apostolic re-awakening that occurred in the early 1900's. The cover of the magazine, as well as the interior article, had photos of many of the men who were members of that early revival and almost all, if not all of them, had long beards. And those were obviously very Godly men absolutely full of the Holy Spirit as evidenced by their frequent and unquestionably miraculous answers to prayer. That pretty much confirmed for me what I had recently come to think about the issue of facial hair. Furthermore, it also revealed to me Bro. Bernard's understanding on the subject since those heavily bearded photos were so prominently displayed throughout that issue of the magazine.
I was privileged to meet Bro. Bernard when he was a young man in Law School at U.T.. His wife is a personal friend of my family that I have known since childhood. When I lived in Austin I attended the congregation where Brother, (Doctor), Bernard was pastor. When his sons became young adults, at least one of them, (perhaps both), had a beard and he was on the platform as part of the music/worship team. One of the ushers had also a thick mustache. That was further evidence, without having to ask, that Pastor Bernard himself didn't not teach against men's facial hair as was common for a few decades in the UPC.
I also realized that Paul taught in GREAT detail about people's PERSONAL convictions. According to Paul, many people's personal convictions are thought by them to be actual rules or standards from God though they are not. As long as those personal convictions are not some form of sin, Paul teaches to NOT try and teach people away from those convictions, that since they believe so strongly in those convictions it would be literal SIN for them to violate them. Paul implies that even when someone's personal conviction is NOT a rule of God, that person has unwittingly given himself to God in a more personal/special way and they must now KEEP those convictions. The REAL surprise to me is how Paul goes on to say that when we attempt to teach someone away from their personal convictions, not only would we cause THEM to sin, but we would be sinning OURSELVES in doing so. I get the idea that a person's personal convictions are akin to the Old Testament Nazarite vow, though without intending for it to be so. The Nazarite vow, with it's ADDED levels of holiness above what the standard Israelite was commanded to adhere to, was voluntary, not a command of God. But once the Nazarite vow was made, though voluntary, it was absolutely a sin to NOT keep the higher than prescribed standards of holiness. That to ME says that if someone still believes it's a sin for a man to have facial hair, I should not attempt to teach them "away" from that belief. If that person ASKS me to explain why I believe facial hair is NOT a sin, then I am free to give him my perspective, still taking care to not to tell him his conviction is wrong.
A life changing experience with Jesus. True salvation will make you embrace modest apparel plain and simple.
If the school is a public school then they must respect your right to religious freedom. In Canada even private schools and work places must respect your right to religious freedom due to being regulated by at least the province if not the federal government. The fall under the Human Rights code at the provincial or federal level.
Great teaching. Amen.
Oh Wow! Thank you Bishop for addressing this like so. I was going to ask this question but you have handled it so well. Gif bless you!🙏
Gender distinction is important but so much discussion over hair and pants is ridiculous...and it's almost always centered around what women can and can't wear. I'm far from a feminist but that sounds like misogyny to me. Women in pants isn't masculine. There are short hair styles for women that are feminine. I see Scottish men in kilts and I don't see them as less masculine although I could never. Times change. Fashion changes. Culture changes. All change isn't contrary to God's will.
God doesn't change, though if you are His child, do what He commands you to if you claim to be His.
Why is it always about a women dress codes?.what about men in jacket and tie like the world????
Exactly, this becomes legalism. Women can dress modest using pants, etc. The modesty comes from the heart to the outside not the otherway
Inward holiness produces outward holiness. If you study the history of when women started wearing pants, you’ll have a better understanding. I’m not dressing modest to be saved, I’m dressing modest because I’m saved.. it’s a product of my salvation. Take for example, tithes and offering, we don’t give to be saved, we give because we are saved. Faith produces fruit!
Bro. Bernard, I hope you will read this question and give me some kind of answer. I have wondered about this for some time, but I have not received any kind of satisfactory answer. The snogas are pants with a skirt sewn on. Yet, we don't believe in wearing pants. So, why is it that so many apostolic women and girls wear these? I know one of the websites you gave is snoga. I am in no way wanting to bash anyone or anything like that. I just truly want to know for myself. Thank you.
I heard another preacher who suggested that an apostolic woman should not accept a job that requires her to wear pants and compromise her beliefs. So glad for this subject to be discussed.
What of God called you to that specific job to reach people others couldn't.
@@seletiapowell7696God doesn’t contradict His Word. If He calls/sends you somewhere His Word goes before and follows.
but bible talks about identity. So woman does not identify as man by wearing clothing not for woman. However, there are pants for woman, as long as holiness comes from the heart to the outside not the other way around
What about the costly apparel. Paul certainly addressed that
Then becomes like pharisees and this legalism. Holiness is not legalism. Is not to do whatever we want but at same time forcing people to do so is not holiness. BTW when Paul wrote a letter of women do not cut the hair, women cut their hair when worship Diana but when they became Christ follower told them to cover the head or let the hair grow just to make a difference that no longer worship a pagan god.
What about women as law enforcement? There is no tactical skirts and u can't chase and arrest people or wear a duty belt in a skirt
So would you say it is a sin or a heaven or hell issue that woman that don’t were skirts or dresses? Just curious. Thank you brother.
No. Clothes is cultural and human made. For example Scottish men wear kilts, and Arabs wear robes.
Bottom line is make sure you wear clothes that is modest, and is designed for your gender. Scripture tells us to not wear our opposite genders clothes, meaning make sure we are identifiable as a man or woman.
I personally don’t believe that a woman must only wear a skirt, and a man can only wear pants. As long as you are identifiable as a man or woman within your culture, and you are modest.
It's really a matter of obeying God and his conviction. If people are obeying man instead of God then there's a problem. If God brings conviction then that's foundational. If man brings conviction then it's sand
Would sin keep you from entering into the Kingdom of God? Of course. Then it is an issue isn't it? But they never will say exactly just let God convict you. Convict you of what? Not to sin so you can enter in? That is what is being said here without really saying it. Which means that if a woman isn't dressed in skirts they aren't making it in, because they are not living a sanctified/holy life. Which means not too many women, starting from the early 1900s, are not making it in. Again, that is what they are saying without saying it
@@mikeeagan1307 actually, Mike, we are not saying it but the word of God, so if you are offended then it is at the word of God.. not apostolics
@@Karen-ur6mm Then give the Scriptures that say so
Any views on secular music? Obviously if its not cursing, about sinning, etc.
What about ladies who get saved in the military?
I commented on a similar question earlier but here it is again if anuone is interested in the expanded version. Ha! I, a woman, was on active duty with the Air Force when I was baptized in Jesus name and filled with the Holy Ghost. Praise God! For the most part, my job afforded me the ability to wear "blues" and I opted to wear the skirt. At times, during training exercises for example, I had to wear what we called back then, "fatigues" - the green uniform with pants. It was an infrequent duty requirement for me so I complied, and I believe the grace of God covered it since I made the commitment to the military before I got in the church. The military is different from a regular job - I couldn't just quit. However, bc of my God-given conviction around modest apparel, I made the decision to separate at the end of the enlistment. I stopped wearing pants off-duty when the Lord convicted me about it. I hope this helps someone.
Can. You address the same topic for the military? Men wear short sleeves and women wear pants as part of their uniform.
Thanks Bishop
A much needed discussion. Thank you, sir ❤️
What does the Bible say about hair dye?
Nothing, and if someone says something, they should never speak beyond it being noted as "possible slim but possible vanity." But, so is that nice car you drive.
Anyone judges someone by their clothes as long as clean and respectful in my opinion is down right wrong
We're not in presence of God because what we wear
It's our hearts and love for our Lord God
Women should not pertains Mens clothes, likewise men should not pertain womens clothes Deutronomy 22:5
The context is important in the text 😃
My brother who designated pants as a man clothing, when historical what they used to wear evidently in the old testament was robes or tunic, male and female wore basically the same garment with the women clothing being distinguished by embroidery or design. Who designated pants solely as a man garment man or God.
@@pepchep but there are pants designed for women they dont use men pant. For me is more legalism. There are sisters at churches that uses very tight dresses, very expensive garment, etc. Does this make them holy? of course not all apostolics are pharisees.
You’d be surprised how many ladies wear pj’s pants at home to sleep in...Also back in the days men wore gowns to sleep in...Clothes is Clothes just material...
I remember this older Apostolic lady telling my mom that she only sleeps in gowns because she doesn't want to get left behind if Jesus returns at night and she's wearing pajama pants. I was just a kid, but I remember thinking that doesn't make any sense because Jesus can return when you're in the middle of getting dressed. I imagined her quickly getting dressed every day, just in case, and I felt bad her. She was probably terrified to shower and use the restroom also 🤷🏽♀️
Thank You! You've earned plenty of respect and your authority is without question.... My unqualified and unsolicited comments are for the sake of stimulating discussion that may help provide useful feedback... So,..... I disagree that the Bible specifically or even vaguely suggests that the exact design/style of clothing we call 'pants' pertains to men only. Like suits and ties (which only promote class distinction and elitist vanity), pants are a modern worldly tradition of men that's been slowly fading away since the early 1900s. I suggest that if a woman wears a modern design of clothing similar to traditional men's pants, but made exclusively for women, it doesn't violate Biblical scripture. Such a design would need to be modest (not tight fitting and not overly adorned). Culottes are one such design. Does any man still insist these are manly? If so, I invite any one of you to wear a pair to church some day!
There's only one God!.... so there's only one holiness! God's holiness! 100% total and absolute separation from all sin!... Every day!... All day!... In every possible way!... Biblically (in the NT) there's no such thing as 'outward holiness'. There's only outward UNholiness. So-called 'outward holiness' is an oxymoron simply because our own righteousness, especially any outward displays using clothing, is like filthy rags!
HOWEVER........ do I think the UPCI (or any other organization) should change? ABSOLUTELY NOT!..... Why? Because it's part of the traditional 'holiness movement' that started when only men wore pants. It's an important part of original Pentecostalism that began in the early 1900s. It's part of the UPCI identity and should remain that way as long as possible. Removing such an integrated tradition now could weaken the UPCI in ways we don't want to imagine or deal with.
My concern is insisting that specific clothing styles (like pants, which are only 'traditions of men') are actually in the Bible when they're not. There's no need to promote the false concept of 'outward holiness' just to make it seem Biblical. It's in error to keep referring to ANY styles of clothing as holy. At best, you could make a case for certain robe styles in the Torah, especially for the priesthood, but that's about it. Unless you're Jewish, no modern clothes should be considered holy. Not here on earth.
Certainly, it's already well within your existing Biblical authority to simply formalize and incorporate a dress code. Why not just do that?.... and.... Call it what it really is..... A DRESS CODE!
May the spirit of the One God (revealed, expressed, and manifest through Jesus the Christ) lead us and guide us into all truth!
ps..... What ever happened to the futuristic idea from the 'space race' visionaries of the 1950s and 60s that everyone would be wearing shiny silver unisex jumpsuits by the year 2000? I always thought they were kinda 'cool' looking when I was a kid. But I suppose we all dodged a bullet with that one! 😁
Ok
👍👍👍👍
Before the feminist movement all realized dresses were women's clothes.. not Christians but everyone.. we should not change with society but stand out as holy..'be ye holy for I am holy ' and we are to be a separated people... however if you want to wear culottes... wear them..I wouldn't but bc I think they are ugly.. so not sure why you felt this needed saying
@@Karen-ur6mm Thanks for your reply........'be ye holy for I am holy ' ..... Is God holy because of his outward appearance and what he wears? To even suggest that any clothes are the least bit holy or can somehow properly display or express holiness in any way, shape, or form is 100% pure vanity and idolatry. Holiness can never be expressed through clothing. Only sin can be expressed through clothing (immodest or wrong gender distinction). God's holiness is 100% absolute separation from ALL sin! Every day! All day! In every way! God's holiness has nothing to do with clothing or outward appearance in any way!
But that doesn't stop practically EVERY religion from using some type of costume or special clothing in a foolish attempt to look holy. The pope's pointy hats. Fancy robes with crosses imprinted. Jewish phylacteries. Nowadays.... worldly suits and ties with shaved faces. It's all selfish pride and vanity (and vexation of spirit). It has nothing to do with Biblical holiness. Zero! You display holiness only by God's spirit and separation from the sins of 'the world'. If someone really wants to look holy......... perhaps they should try wearing "sackcloth and ashes" for a while. The most popular outward expression of inner humility and repentance found in the Bible. It's the closest thing to expressing any 'outward holiness' using clothing that you'll find.
Has true Biblical holiness (separation from sin) become nothing more than wearing certain clothing styles and making certain fashion statements?
What a shameful display of filthy UNholy unrighteous rags! Adam and Eve's use of a fig leaf didn't really cover their shame. Neither will 'Pentecostal' style clothing cover anyone's shame!
Thanks again!...... and NO!...... I would never wear culottes (a women's style of pants)...... That would be an UNholy display of sin!..... Why?..... Because I'm a man. I suppose I could wear a man's skirt (Scottish kilt). It was once a masculine distinction for men who went to war. It proudly identified their clan. Though technically, a 'kilt' is more of a wrap, it still looks like a woman's skirt. In the modern society where I live, a skirt is still exclusively a women's style of clothing....... Thank God! 😇
Loved this comment! Respectful yet resolved. Lovely, M T.
How about people who become Apostolic as police officers or soldiers?
I was on active duty with the Air Force when I was born again. At times, the military uniform requirements conflicted with my Apostolic beliefs. Since I made a commitment to serve my country before I got in the church, I did (wore) what was required for the remainder of my enlistment but separated from active duty when that enlistment was up.
MarianLous is another good source for modest clothing
Love Bro. Bernard, however, he mentions, orthodox Jews, Muslims, mennonites, and Amish in regards to apparel however, he does leave out the God-given distinction of the man’s beard that each of these religious entities hold to.
The early Pentecostal movement was filled with *manly men with God-given facial distinction.
The bible recorded that the was first garment that was created was created by God in the book of Genesis, and also the bible name those Garments " Genesis 3 vs 21-
King James Bible
Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them. Question: where in the bible does it says that pants is solely a man garment? did God name a man garment Pants? Historical the isarelites wore robes, the bible record jesus wearing a tunic, the male and female Garments Historically among ancient isarelites were basically same with differences in kinds pertaining to style and embroidery. Amongst a few bible version translations the NasB is amongst them that mis transalate Daniel 3 vs 27 by inserting trousers instead of robes or cloak, which what helps creates this confusion with pants amongst women and men, They translate a specific verse within the book of Daniel incorrectly which add to this confusion that a pants a is disgnated male garment...
NASB 1995 Daniel 3 vs 27
The satraps, the prefects, the governors and the king’s high officials gathered around and saw in regard to these men that the fire had no effect on the bodies of these men nor was the hair of their head singed, nor were their trousers damaged, nor had the smell of fire even come upon them. Historically Garments that was worn back in the old testament was of the same kind with the difference in embroidery and designed which is what was used to determined the difference in male and female, however a man pants may be the same in kind but is distinguished in style embroidery or design, one can tell the difference by design or style a man pants and female. Through progression into adaptation came about pants which was originated in the 1500s, known at that time as trousers were mostly wore by men because women were primarily station in the home taking of children and the home, trouser was more suited to wear when riding horses and back in those it was men that primarily rode horses. So the question left unanswered who designated pants as a man's Garment? Pants could be designated female garment as well not because it was man whom first wore it, how can we be so certain it is a man's garment!? The bible is our guide book and it is no were to be found in the bible that pants is a designated male garment. If we put so much attention in Garments, why don't we wear robes and tunics? Cause none of the the isarelites,the 12 apostle,people in the new testament times or Even Jesus wore pants.
You know a good way to gender distinct ? Grow your facial hair! But y’all don’t wanna hear that lol
If I let my facial hair grow, I would look like a man! As a lady, I need to shave my facial hair! lol!
*James 1:27* *Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.*
I live here, but I’m not from here. Nor do I want to look or sound like I’m from here. *Philippians 3:20* *For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ:*
Where I’m from (and I’m just passing through here to get back to there), we have our *OWN SPEECH,* *Matthew 5:37* *But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.* Our *OWN DRESS,* Exodus 31:10* *and the cloths of service, and the holy garments for Aaron the priest, and the garments of his sons, to minister in the priest’s office,*
*Exodus 35:19* *the cloths of service, to do service in the holy place, the holy garments for Aaron the priest, and the garments of his sons, to minister in the priest’s office.*
*Revelation 19:8* *And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.*
and our *OWN MUSIC. Ephesians 5:19* *speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord;*
*Colossians 3:16* *Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.*
I don’t want anything from here. I’ve rejected the things of this world, which in include their speech, dress and music which is all junk. My Father has far more superior things than what is being offered here. There is no comparison. 🇨🇦
Short story, what would Jesus say ? Cultures are different, the era of bible days are different .
Jesus was a Jew and wore a beard, look up their customs.
We gotta stop making everything sin❤
1 Timothy 2:9 says that "women should adorn themselves in modest apparel," but who decided that all pants are immodest? Pants can be modest or immodest and so can dresses and skirts. Deuteronomy 22:5 says that "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." Apostolic Pentecostals use this verse as another example of why women shouldn't wear pants, but pants are not the issue here. This verse is about identifying and presenting as the opposite gender, (i.e. transgenderism), which goes against God's design. If God wants men to only wear pants and women to only wear dresses and skirts, is it a sin for men to wear kilts or tunics? Sometimes it's a part of someone's culture. Those men are wearing men's clothing.
Laura Guerra joining in from little rock arkansas.I see people in church.u.p.c.I made the comment that the young lady that was up there doing praise and worship.if she was going to be in leadership.she should be in a dress.I see a lot of u.p.c minsters wife in pants that once taught mondist.holyness.love your books.its sure as changed God word doesn't . my self I will never take a job .if they said I would half to wear of pants.once I got into the church.
(1 Cor 6:12 KJV) All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.
According to the verse above, all things are lawful for those who are in Christ, but not all things are profitable.
In other words, there are things that Christians do that will bring glory to the Lord and there are also things that Christians do that bring him shame.
As long as Jesus is at the Father's Right Hand the time remains to confess any sins or wrong doings that may have brought shame to the Lord or to others.
If a believer chooses not to deal with any of their wrong doings now in this time of mercy a d grace, then the Lord will have no choice but to deal with them at the JSOC in the future. (2 Cor 5:10-11)