Expert: Dr Don Howe - 12/31/2008

Question
Dear Dr. Howe,

I was brought up in the Pentecostal church (Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada).  As an adult I became a pastor.  I eventually resigned for several reasons but primarily because of the spiritual abuse I witnessed and was victim to from male pastors in leadership.  I have kept my Christian beliefs in the meantime and began dating a United Pentecostal man a short time ago.

His denomination is new to me.  My church let women have the liberty to cut their hair, wear make up and pants to church and at home, wear jewelry, etc.  The focus was based more on spiritual and moral character of the heart rather than on outside appearance.

Recently this man I have been seeing has been sharing his own church's view on these matters and I feel that the Scripture verses that the UPC use are taken out of context in regards to the way women are expected to present themselves outwardly.  That salvation is not earned by outward appearance in these ways.  

I feel that the UPC is manipulating, judging and controlling women by twisting Scripture in this way.  I also feel that their theology is taken out of context to what the original Hebrew and Greek writings were intended to convey.

I want to challenge this man's beliefs in the hopes that he will be open to taking a deeper look at the Scriptures instead of primarily relying on what his pastors and leaders have taught him.

But most of all, I need some clarification and understanding along with Biblical truths for myself about the UPC's beliefs and expectations regarding women.  I want to know what is "right" and what is "wrong", along with if these are man-made religious laws that I believe Jesus came to set us free from.  Or are these based wholly in Scripture in it's original text?  

I don't believe that God (Jesus) expects women of this day and age to dress like they just came out of the late 1800s.  Who decided on these standards?  Why are men and women judged so critically on outside appearances?  Who originally decided that men could not have beards or goatees in order to be "holy"?  Why are men allowed to wear pants now when in Scriptural times, I really think they wore long tunics (dresses?)?  Are there any scriptures about women wearing make-up or jewelry who were not considered evil?  When Paul wrote the scriptures in regards to hair and modesty, what was the culture like back then?  What context was he writing in?  

Are the UPC expectations similar to the Pharisee expectations?

I have so many questions.  My friend is encouraging me to talk to one of the women in church leadership or the male pastors.  But the UPC view a woman asking these sorts of questions as being rebellious and of the wrong spirit.  I don't even think they would take me seriously.  But I just want to know the truth and the source of these truths.  I am tired of man made laws and legalism that is not from God.

I would appreciate your professional opinion and knowledge on these matters.  Please accept my apologies for this lengthy "question".  Besides any answers you may have for me, I would also appreciate any other sources you can direct me to for further guidance.

Bless you and thank-you for your time and feedback!

Sincerely,
Alexa


Answer
   Alexia, thank you for your question. Sounds like you leaving one spiritual abusive church (Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada) and you are fixing to get into another FOR SURE  spiritually abusive church. The UPC is very spiritually abusive. Some apologist would even include the UPC as a cult. Some UPC preachers are famous. J.D. Jakes of the Potter’s House is a Oneness Pentecostal UPC doctrinal church, but he is very popular. One reason for this is that some people worship the Preacher and not the Father in Heaven.
   Alexia, you stated “I have kept my Christian beliefs in the meantime and began dating a United Pentecostal man a short time ago.” I am going to tell you that you need to forget this man if he stays in the UPC church. If you get into the UPC church you are committing spiritual suicide and you are going to get spiritually hurt again. This man you are dating may be the great man, but I would get it straight that you are not going to a UPC church, and if he loves you, the two of you can agree on a middle ground of going together to a charismatic nondenominational church.
   The UPC is a very controlling church and does not have a biblical view of women. One way they control and put down women is by telling them how they should and should not dress. Alexia, remember God’s Word is the standard and if a church does not match that standard stay away from it. If as my mother use to say, “if it ain’t in the Word of God it ain’t so.” I found this to be theological sound also. God made our mother’s to be so wise. I miss my mother she is dead now.
   You stated “His denomination is new to me.  My church let women have the liberty to cut their hair, wear make up and pants to church and at home, wear jewelry, etc.  The focus was based more on spiritual and moral character of the heart rather than on outside appearance.” You go onto say “Recently this man I have been seeing has been sharing his own church's view on these matters and I feel that the Scripture verses that the UPC use are taken out of context in regards to the way women are expected to present themselves outwardly.  That salvation is not earned by outward appearance in these ways.” And you are correct, the UPC does take Scriptures out of context and as Peter tells us in 2 Peter 3:16 “. . .  they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as [they do] also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.” Wrest here means to twist the Scriptures. So the UPC wrest or twist the Scriptures which exhibits their being unlearned and unstable unto their own destruction, which why they are called by some a cult.
You stated that “salvation is not earned by outward appearances in these ways.” Salvation is not earned period and especially by outward appearance. Salvation is a free gift given by God’s grace alone, by faith alone, in Christ alone. Outward appearance has nothing to do with Salvation. It is by the blood of Christ that we are saved believing in his atonement for our sins.
   Alexia you stated “I feel that the UPC is manipulating, judging and controlling women by twisting Scripture in this way.  I also feel that their theology is taken out of context to what the original Hebrew and Greek writings were intended to convey.” Alexia, cults are all about control of the its members, and usually there is one head honcho who is the lead spiritual abuser, everyone around him kiss his boots, he is not accountable to no one, if there is any deacons they are just yes men to him and rubber stamp approval everything he does, they are usually sexually immoral and expects no one to correct him, if people do challenge the leader they are usually kicked out, and they like controlling members by telling what to wear and what not to wear. So controlling people by what they wear is typical this type of group.
CLARIFICATION AND UNDERSTANDING OF UPC.
   Alexia you asked “I need some clarification and understanding along with Biblical truths for myself about the UPC's beliefs and expectations regarding women.  I want to know what is "right" and what is "wrong", along with if these are man-made religious laws that I believe Jesus came to set us free from.  Or are these based wholly in Scripture in it's original text?”
   When it comes to the Word of God there is no “right” or “wrong” as far as the way Scriptures are interpreted based on a particular false religions wresting the Scriptures (2 Pet. 3:16) by unlearned men of any particular legalistic religion such as the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada or UPC. These legalistic and false religions like to wrest the Scriptures to fit their own agenda and beliefs, and they are all wrong when they do this. But I will give you the literal grammatical-historical interpretation given in context of the times it was written and the author of the book. And you can look them for yourself also.
    Alexia, the UPC does have a some false doctrine in their belief system. That being the case you stated “I want to challenge this man's beliefs in the hopes that he will be open to taking a deeper look at the Scriptures instead of primarily relying on what his pastors and the leaders have taught him.” This is not the right attitude to take because now you are being pharisaical and being legalistic and saying I am going to show how much he is wrong and make myself look good. When you do this with religions that stick with false doctrine it only makes them fell like they are that much more right and the rest of the world is wrong. But you need to show grace and God’s love to this man and not righteous indignation as to who is wrong me or him. I hope you do not have this mindset.
  I want to compare some of the doctrine of the Assemblies, which you are familiar with, and the UPC so you can compare.

COMPARSION OF THE PENTECOTSTAL ASSEMBLIES OF CANADA AND UPC DOCTRINES.

THE GODHEAD-
   The Pentecostal Assemblies state right off their website http://www.bible.ca/cr-PAOC.htm states: “The Godhead exists eternally in three persons; the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. These three are one God, having the same nature and attributes, and are worthy of the same homage, confidence, and obedience. Math. 3:16,17; 28:19, 2 Cor. 13:14. The Assemblies have their doctrine straight on the Trinity.
   The UPC are sometimes referred to as Oneness Pentecostal. David K. Bernard in his book The Oneness of God defines Oneness Pentecostalism as “the doctrine that God is absolutely one in numerical value, that Jesus is the one God, and that God is not a plurality of persons." In another way to say it is the United Pentecostals call their theology "Oneness" because they believe a plurality of persons does not exist within God's nature. In other words, God exists only as one "person." But this is not biblically or theologically sound.
   Alexia, you have picked up on this already. One thing about false doctrine is that it looks good on the outside but once you start looking theologically and biblically on the inside it is bad. Like a wolf in sheep clothing as Jesus talked about. UPC looks orthodox, but it is really heretical. Robert Bowman, Jr in his article Oneness Pentecostalism and the Trinity states “What sets Oneness Pentecostalism apart from other anti-Trinitarian heresies is its seeming orthodoxy. Unlike Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses, for example, Oneness Pentecostals teach both that there is one God and that Jesus is fully God. For this reason, many Christians have difficulty seeing anything wrong with the Oneness position. Moreover, unlike Mormonism and similar sects, Oneness Pentecostals make no appeal whatsoever to extrabiblical literature or modern leaders for authoritative interpretations of Scripture. Compared to many other controversial sects, Oneness Pentecostalism appears quite orthodox in many respects.” He goes on “If the Oneness doctrine is heretical, then, it must be admitted to be a much subtler error than that of many current heresies. Subtlety does not, however, make an error less dangerous, but more, since the subtler the error the more people are likely to fall for it (people are more apt to accept a criminal's counterfeit bills as real money than they are Monopoly bills). This potential danger makes it all the more important that the Oneness teaching be evaluated on the basis of Scripture.”
    But Oneness theology is heresy but is old and not new. This is an ancient heresy known by a number of different names, including Modalism, Monarchianism, and especially Sabellianism - after Sabellius, a third-century teacher who prominently championed this doctrinal position. The orthodox position is that the God of the Bible exists as three distinct persons - Father, Son, and Holy Spirit - who are one essence or being sharing all attributes of deity including eternality, infinitude, uncreated spirituality, omniscience, omnipresence, and omnipotence. The doctrine of the Trinity is derived from Scriptures that clearly show different entities (The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit) that are all ascribed all the characteristics of both individual person-hood (intellect, emotions, and will) and a divine nature.
      So Alexia, you can see this is an old doctrine, it is heretical but looks orthodox on the outside, and it’s presentation can be a subtle error as compared to other heresies, but still dangerous.
    The UPC believe the doctrine of the Trinity is not mentioned in Scripture, and you will probably here your male friend make this argument. Oneness doctrine restores the biblical doctrine of God that was held by the apostles. Just because the term “trinity” is not specifically mentioned in the bible does not mean it does not exist. From the a UPC publication, Meet the United Pentecostal Church International , states “Trinitarians sometimes explain that the Old Testament monotheistic passages merely speak of perfect agreement and unity among the trinity, excluding a plurality of false deities but not a plurality of persons in the true God. This view would allow outright polytheism, however, for many distinct deities could exist in perfect harmony. Neither testament uses the word trinity or associates the word three or the word persons with God in any significant way." Wayne House states about this “Often those who reject the Trinity do so partly on the grounds that the term is not found in the Bible. It is true that the word Trinity (Latin trinitas, three in one) is not found in Scripture, since it arose from a theological attempt to explain the biblical teaching. This doctrine derives from the combination of Scripture paassages that present the idea that three persons simultaneously exist within the monotheistic God. Several passages implicitly allow for the doctrine (Gen. 1:26- 27; 11:5-9; Ps 2:7; Isa 6:8, 9), while various passages explicitly teach the idea (Mt 3:16-17; 28:19; Jn 17:1-5; 2 Cor 13:14). The attempt to identify these different persons as merely roles played by one person does an injustice to the One God. The three persons are described as distinct from one another and possessing personal attributes, yet in union with one another in one essence. "Roles" or "natures' do not communicate, love, will, or express emotion, but a 'person' does. When the Father and the Son communicate, there is a demand for the two persons to be involved, not two natures. Only persons can express intellect, emotion, and will.”
    The UPC also believe God consists of Jesus only, who Is the Father. God is not three distinct persons. House explains “The confusion arises in the definition and understanding of personhood versus nature. A person can be described as self-aware and aware of others who are also self-aware, having an intellect, being volitional (having a will), and capable of emotional thought and sensibilities or feelings. A nature is different from a person as it describes the parameters and essence of personal qualities or attributes. The human nature is finite in its intellectual comprehension, whereas God is infinite. The same can be said of all aspects of personality shared by God and mankind. This understanding helps to explain how man can be made in the image of God and yet can never legitimately hope to be God.
Nature can also describe character. God's nature is contrasted with fallen human nature in that God is good and man is evil. Jesus shared man's nature in the person-hood sense, but not in character, as he was without sin.”
  The UPC believe the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, rather than being three distinct persons within the Godhead, are actually titles that describe the multiple roles played by God as He has progressively revealed Himself to mankind. The UPC like to demean the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit not as three distinct persons but are different roles played by one God. The idea that God role-plays or assumes modes of function - acting as the Father at one moment, the Holy Spirit at another, and the Son at another time - is why the Oneness groups are called modalists.
   The UPC the doctrine of the Trinity is unbibilcal. The UPC is again hiding behind the fact that the specific word trinity is not used in OT or NT. House states on this “Scriptural examples abound of divine persons interacting and being aware of one another's existence. Jesus refers to Himself and His Father as providing two witnesses (persons who can speak, not natures that cannot speak) for the authentication of His ministry (Jn 5:31-32; 8:16-18). This complies with the Mosaic injunction that everything be confirmed by at least two witnesses. For just a devine nature and a human nature to bear witness would be tantamount to saying in court that your body and your mind, or your physical nature and your nonphysical soul nature, will give two distinct testimonies. The Father is known to have sent the Son (see Jn 3:17; Gal 4:4; 1 Jn 4: 10). This shows that Jesus not only existed, before His earthly life, in eternity with the Father, but that there was an interaction in eternity between the Father and the Son before there ever was a human nature of Jesus. Perhaps most significant is the fact that the Father loves and shows approval of the Son (see Jn 3:35; 17:23-26). People or persons can show love, but natures can't.”

DOCTRINE OF SALVATION:

  The Pentecostal Assemblies believe about Salvation “Salvation has been provided for all men through the sacrifice of Christ upon the cross. Isa. 53:36; John 12:32,33; 1 Pet. 2:24 It is the only perfect redemption and substitutionary atonement for all the sins of the world, both original and actual. His atoning work has been proven by His resurrection from the dead. Acts 2:36; Rom. 4:25; 1 Cor. 15:14, 17, 20; Heb. 10:12; 1 John 2:2 Those who repent and believe in Christ are born again of the Holy Spirit and receive eternal life. Acts 20:21; 1 Pet. 1:23,25 Furthermore, in the atonement, divine healing was provided for all believers. Isa. 53:4,5; Matt. 8:16b,17.” They have this part right again.
   The UPC is eat up with heresy when it comes to Salvation. They believe that one must be baptized in order to be saved. On the basis of such passages as Acts 2:38 which speaks of being baptized "for the remission of your sins" and John 3:5 where Jesus says one must be born "of water and of Spirit" Oneness Pentecostals argue that baptism is absolutely essential for one to have their sins forgiven and be born again.
This position, obviously, simply dismisses the numerous other passages of Scripture which unequivocally teach that salvation is by grace through faith alone. Over 60 times in the New Testament it is proclaimed that salvation is for those who believe (e.g. Jn.3:15, 36, 5:24, Acts 2:21, 10:43, 15:9, 16:31, Rom. 1:17, 3:22-30, 4:3-5, Eph. 2:8, etc.). Baptism is regarded as being a sign and seal of salvation (see Rom. 4:9-11, Col. 2:11-12), not the basis of salvation. One must wonder how Jesus could promise the thief on the cross eternal life if baptism were essential for salvation as the Oneness Pentecostals claim.
Acts 2:28 is the one of the verses that they basis that baptism is necessary to save us. It states “Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” The word for in the Greek is eis means in view of" or "in the light of." That's why John the Baptist's pre-Christian baptisms are also said to be "for (eis) the remission of sins" (Mk. 1:4, Lk. 3:3), though no one believes his baptism literally washed away sin. Jesus hadn't even died yet!
    They like to use John 3:5 states “Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and [of] the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” The word born is gennaō in the Greek which means to bring forth, delivered, or of one who brings others over to his way of life, to convert someone. Jesus is using in this sense in that except a man is brought forth, converted, delivered by water or spirit he can enter the Kingdom of Heaven. This born again could also mean bringing forth water of the cleansing prophesied in Ezekiel 36:25-28 as part of the New Covenant because of its firm connections to Old Testament prophecy - which Jesus says Nicodemus should have know to understand these things (Jesus stated this in Jn. 3:10). The does not say anything about salvation based on baptism, does not mention word born again, or use the word baptism.
    Alexia, the UPC teaches not only the necessity of believers baptism by immersion a requirement for salvation: they also teach that it must be administered using the formula "in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ" if it is to be saving. God hangs all eternity not only on a ritual, but on the precise wording that is said during a ritual! On the Oneness view, anyone baptized "in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" is, in their view, yet unsaved. Mat 28:19 knocks this “in the name of Jesus only” heresy out the water. The text states “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.
     This verse shows us to baptism in the name of the three persons of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit which is co-equal with each other. This does not say in the name of Jesus only.
The Oneness Pentecostal like to attempt to base their view of the baptismal formula on the fact that baptism in the book of Acts is said to be "in the name of Jesus" as seen in Acts 2:38. Acts 2:38 states “Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” Peter said to unto them (plural) repent (in the Greek is plural) means metanoeō to change ones mind or heartily to amend with abhorrence of one's past sins. Peter is talking to a crowd here (the word them meaning plural) and they are to repent (plural verb) or change one’s mind (by coming to faith in Jesus Christ) or amend with abhorrence of one’s past sins. Alexia, then there is a comma, which means that repent is a separate act, and then the next act is everyone of you (singular) be baptized in the name of Jesus based upon faith. As stated above the word for in the Greek is eis means in view of" or "in the light of." The word remission in the Greek is aphesis which means release from bondage or imprisonment. Everyone of you be baptized in view of the release from bondage from sin in the name of Jesus. Guzik states “Peter says they must do is be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, as an expression of their belief and complete trust in Him.” Longnecker states “While baptism with water was the expected symbol for conversion, it was not an indispensable criterion for salvation.”
      Another thought on this “in the name of Jesus.” Gregory Boyd states “The fact that Luke refers to baptism in the book of Acts as being "in the name of Jesus," or some related phrase (2:38, 8:16, 10:48, 19:5) doesn't affect this in the least. First the fact that all four baptismal references in Acts differ significantly from one another is enough to show us that we are not dealing with a ritualistic formula at all (certainly not one upon which all eternity hangs!). Secondly, the phrase "in the name of in Semitic thought was equivalent to "in the authority of" or "with the significance of" (e.g. Mt. 10:40-42). Hence, for example, Paul tells us that we are to do all things "in the name of the Lord jesus" (Col. 3:27), though he certainly doesn't intend us to say out loud the name of Christ when we do anything at all. He is simply telling us to do everything for the glory of God. No spoken formula is intended.”
   Alexia, one can become saved without being baptized. It is by faith are we saved, not by works. Saying one has to be baptized to be saved is also work salvation.
The Assemblies also have a false teaching called the Doctrine of Subsequence, which is a doctrine that one is to have a baptism of the Holy Spirit which is subsequent to Salvation. This is heresy also because we receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit when we are saved and  THERE IS NOT SUCH THING AS A SECOND BAPTISM OF THE HOLY SPIRIT SEPARATE (SUBSQUENT) TO SALVATION.

THE WAY WE SHOULD DRESS:

   Alexia this the one that bothers you the most and it is riddled with spiritual abuse and control by the UPC. I could not find anything on the Assemblies Statement of Faith that addressed anything about dress. So the this is a UPC heresy.
Articles of Faith of the United Pentecostal Church International, pp. 9 – 10 states “We wholeheartedly disaprove of our people indulging in any activities which are not conducive to good Christianity and godly living, such as theaters, dances, mixed bathing, women cutting their hair, make-up, any apparel that immodestly exposes the body, all wordly sports and amusements; and unwholesome radio programs and music. Furthermore, because of the display of all these evils on television, we disapprove of any of our people having television sets in their homes."
    They basis this on their interpretation of 1 Cor. 11:4-6, but remember Paul is addressing strictly the women in the Corinthian church and the Jewish head covering rituals of his day. Paul is also addressing authority in the church and church polity. When you keep this in this context it easy to understand what he is referring. There was a problem with the women of the Cornithian church speaking out in meeting out order and were disruptive, which is specifically found in 1 Cor. 14:34-35 (I will get to that because you need this also).
1 Cor. 11:4-6 states “Every man praying or prophesying, having [his] head covered, dishonoureth his head. But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with [her] head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.” Alexia, this head covering issue was not so strange in Paul’s time, in fact it was a custom. Concerning this “dishonoureth his head” and “dishonoureth her head,” David Guzik in his Commentary gives some good insight and states “Because of this order of authority, it is inappropriate for men to pray under a head covering, and inappropriate for women to pray without a head covering. The idea of a head covering was important in this (and many other) ancient cultures. To wear the head covering (or, veil in some translations), was a public symbol of being under the authority and protection of another.” Clarke goes further and states ““It was a custom, both among the Greeks and Romans, and among the Jews an express law, that no woman should be seen abroad without a veil. This was, and is, a common custom through all the east, and none but public prostitutes go without veils.”
        So every woman could pray and prophesy in public with her head covered was customary. The woman who did and prophesy could not interpret the prophesy as this was limited by the men in the assembly. D. A. Carson in his book Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood concurs with this interpretation “Paul has just been requiring the church in Corinth carefully weigh the prophecies presented to it. Women, of course, may participate in prophesying; that was established in chapter 11. Paul’s point here, however, is that they may not participate in the oral weighing of such prophecies. This is not permitted in any of the churches.” So it was custom in Paul's day for women to cover her head. This in not appropriate for today. Paul was speaking specifically to the Cornithian church.
       Let go all the way with this. Some male authoritarian glory-seekers like to use 1 Cor. 14:34-35 to put women in submission and to try to silence them in the gift teaching and in these following verses deals with prophesying. But let us look what God is saying. 1 Cor. 14:34-35 states “Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but [they are commanded] to be under obedience, as also saith the law.   And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. You have to keep these verses in context as Paul is speaking of a specific problem in the Corinthian Church (not referring to all women in all churches)  as the women were speaking in the assembly out of order, and in disruptive manner. In verse 34, Paul is saying let your women (the women in the Corinthian Church specifically) keep silence in the churches (the Corinthian churches). Paul saying that is not permitted unto them (the Corinthian women) to speak. In verse 35, Paul is saying if they (the Corinthian women) learn anything let them ask their husbands at home and it is a shame for women (still speaking of the Corinthian women) speak in the church.
    The Nelson Study Bible concurs with this being a problem in the Corinthian church states concerning verse 34 and 35 “Paul’s command here is  the subject of much debate, for it seems to contradict the fact that Paul spoke of women prophesying in 11:5. It has been suggested that Paul was addressing a particular problem in the Corinthian church, a group of women who were disruptive.”
     And all this done (in verses 34-35) for edification (1 Cor. 7:26).
      1 Tim. 2:8-11 addresses more about women's dress and submission to male authority in the church than 1 Corinthian 11. In 1 Tim, Paul is addressing the church in Ephesus, not Corinth.
     1 Tim. 2: 8 states “I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.” The word will is  boulomai  in the Greek which means to will deliberately or have a purpose. Paul is using strong words here. He is I purposefully will thererore that men pray every where. The term that men Paul is expecting men to lead the public worship. Guzik states “Paul assumed men would take the lead at meetings of the congregation. Since the lifting up of hands was a common posture of prayer in ancient cultures, this text speaks of men leading public prayer - men representing the congregation before God’s throne. The ministers of public prayer must be the men of the congregation, not the women. Hands that are lifted up must be holy - hands that are set apart unto God, and not given over to evil. Such prayers must be without wrath (praying “angry” prayers) and without doubting (praying without faith). When we pray angry, or pray without faith, we can do more bad than good – especially when the prayer is public” (my emphasis). So men are purposefully to lead the prayers in public and pray everywhere with holy hands that are set apart from God and not praying angry prayers or prayers without faith.
Verse 9 states “In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array.” Paul is saying in like manner the women are to be like the men being holy, set apart from God, not be angry, and no doubting in public worship by adorning themselves in “modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety.” The word modest is kosmios  which means well arranged, modest, or of good behavior.
    Alexia, Paul is saying the women of the Church in Ephesus should adorn themselves in kosmios in well arranged manner and be of good behavior. Remember what the  Articles of Faith of the United Pentecostal Church International stated "We wholeheartedly disaprove of our people indulging in any activities women cutting their hair, make-up, any apparel that immodestly exposes the body.” Paul is not saying anything about  about women cutting their hair,  wearing make-up, or any apparel that immodestly exposes the body. But to adorn yourself in a well arranged manner, modest,  and be of good behavior.

      Shamefacedness is a mouthful which means aidōs or propriety, reverence, regard for others, respect for others, modesty, like  being appropriate for the occasion not being overdressed, or underdressed. Sobriety is sōphrosynē  which means soundness of mind or self-control. So Paul is saying he women need to be like the men and in public worship should dress in a well arranged or modest manner showing reverence and regard for others, not being overdressed our underdressed and being under self-control. How many times have you seen women in church who were dressed inappropriately. Paul is saying for women to be holy, they should not dress like that (being inappropriate), and should not have braided hair, gold, pearl, or costly array (which means being overdressed), but be self-controlled and soundness of mind. Paul is not saying you have to wear dresses only, you can not wear pants, you can not cut your hair as the UPC says. Alexia, there was a problem in the church of Ephesus of women being overdressed and prideful in adorning a large amount of gold, pearl, braided hair, and costly array. That is why Paul said to dress reverently, respectfully, modestly, being appropriate for the occasion, not under or overdressed (aidōs)  and to be of soundness of mind or self-control. Paul is more concerned about exhibiting godly Christian behavior through dress but he did specifically single out braided hair, gold, pearl, and costly array but it was a specific problem in the Church at Ephesus.
   You can already see that Paul is saying that public worship should be reverent, not having angry or doubting prayers in public by men and women should be holy just like the men by not overdressing or under dressing in public worship.
     Verse 10 states “But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.”  The best adornment is godliness exhibited by good works. Guzik states about this “The most important adornment is good works. If a woman is dressed in propriety and moderation, with good works, she is perfectly dressed. Good works make a woman more beautiful than good jewelry.” I like what the Nelson Study Bible says “A Christian
Woman’s beauty is found in her godly character and her love for the Lord as demonstrated in all types of good works.”
    Verse 11 states “Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.” Paul had a great respect for women in the church. The “let the woman learn” is a command that she should learn in silence. Some have taken this out context and said women are forbidden to speak at church meetings and this interpretation is from hell itself. No, no, no. God forbid. The word silence in the Greek is hesuchios  which means quiet or quietness which is same word in 1 Tim 2:2 which refers to quiet and peacefully and without contention (means causing strife or trouble). Nelson Study Bible states “Paul ignored popular myths about women being incapable of learning and urged Timothy to provide opportunities for women to be educated. In silence refers to the woman’s attitude or manner while learning, as should be true of all believers. Paul was not saying that a woman could not speak in the local assembly.”
    The NIV uses the word submission, but NJV uses a better word of subjection which means obedience.
    Paul is saying that women are commanded to be able to learn in quietness and obedience. This the way all Christians should learn from the Word of God.

    Alexia you asked “Are the UPC expectations similar to the Pharisee expectations?” The answer is Yes. And you can see why from the verses above. The UPC takes these verses out of context and like Matt. 23:4  states “For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay [them] on men's shoulders.”
    Alexia you also stated “ My friend is encouraging me to talk to one of the women in church leadership or the male pastors.  But the UPC view a woman asking these sorts of questions as being rebellious and of the wrong spirit.  I don't even think they would take me seriously. But I just want to know the truth and the source of these truths.  I am tired of man made laws and legalism that is not from God.” I am going to tell you do not waste your time talking to women in church leadership or the male pastors of a UPC church, as you will get the same arguments that is given in their Articles of Faith of the United Pentecostal Church International, so you will be like a dog chasing his tail and not accomplish anything. When you are dealing with cults, when the male leadership are challenged they will only concur with themselves that they are right because someone questioned them. And you were  right in the first place “I don't even think they would take me seriously.” Do not waste your time talking to the UPC. But  I have given you their 3 biggest false doctrines (straight out of their own  literature) compared to the Assemblies of Canada, and the exegesis of the verses of God’s word in the context that they were written. And you can tell that when Paul was addressing the women, men, and male leadership of the Corinithian church and the church of Ephesus he was showing God’s grace and instruction, plus he wanted them to exhibit Christian behavior during worship and to dress with modesty for the occasion and be of sound mind. Paul was dealing with specific problems in both churches.
    As far as this UPC man goes that you have been seeing, you are going to have to choose is it worth challenging his UPC false beliefs and get in a cuss and discuss fight with him. If I were you, I would forget him and find me a Godly Christian Baptist fella and let god work His will through both of you.
   
   Blessing to you and MAY GOD GIVE YOU THE PEACE THAT SURPASSES ALL UNDERSTANDING, GIVE YOU HIS PEACE, AND HELP YOU TO ALWAYS LEARN STRAIGHT FROM HIS WORD AND NOT FROM THE TRADITIONS OF MEN.

Dr. Don Howe, RN, PhD, ThD.