#101-The Bathroom Door Argument

When discussing biblical principals with secular individuals it often becomes difficult to employ scripture in the conversation as a justification for Apo-Pento principles. Often the creative mind is forced to seek an extra-biblical reference point by which to illustrate our reasoning.

Such tactics have been used in the debate against homosexuality by declaring that those types of relations are not found in nature and henceforth are un-natural.

So when discussing the often hotly debated pants-vs.-skirts topic of apostolic women we find ourselves in a corner, against the ropes, taking blow after blow from the opposing forces of this world who seem to believe that it’s justifiable that women wear sin bottoms (pants).

And just as we’re about to hit the mats, we rise like Mike Tyson in the third round match against Holyfield and theoretically bite the ear off our opponent with the declaration: “If you think that it is permissible for women to wear pants then explain to me why every bathroom door in the world illustrates them with a skirt on!”

Alas! Victory is ours! We thank heavens for the graphic designer who once penned the silhouette of a feminine figure, a-line skirt in tow. For without this wondrous illustration we’d be left in our corner, as a proverbial Mills Lane raises the battered glove of the pro-sin-bottom secularist in triumphant victory above us.

But he shan’t. Not today.

Not until our opponent thinks to beg the question: “But in that same picture you reference the female has not only cut hair, but a shaved head. What of this?”

Let’s just pray our worthy opponent never has this light bulb sparkle above his battered head.

#100-Halloween and Sleepovers: Giving apostolic females an excuse to pour make up on your face

Okay, I could have opened up my facebook to any teenage apostolic girl's profile and find at least 10-500 pictures of her dowsed in make up at some private gathering.....but i don't out my facebook friends like that...

But I am sure each one of you has the same kind of friends...use those friends and the pictures I am describing as your frame of reference....

Halloween

But for adults in the world, all Halloween is becoming is an excuse for adult and/or teenage females to dress like whores. Whether it be a the whore nurse, whore angel, whore witch, whore high school student, or whore pirate...All of these costumes are popular amongst the secular ladies because they provide the minimal amount of clothing to be required by law without being cited for indecent exposure. They usually entail an incredibly short skirt, a low hanging top, and some terrible whorish looking leggings/stocking...Of course to top it off, all of these costumes entail Hooker Boots.

Well, our fight for apostolic identity has fended off these demon costumes for the time being. However, our ceremonial Halloween contradiction comes in the use of girls thinking it's suddenly okay to douse themselves with make-up (devil's paint). As if Halloween was the one day a year where the Holy Ghost made a voluntary exit out of our lives all for the sake of having a good time....

Please understand, I am not a legalist when it comes to make up whatsoever (my sister wears fake-up (cover-up))...I just find it laughable when girls who think it an absolute sin to compromise their facial integrity to the devil's paint, think it permissible when others aren't looking or with the Halloween exception....

Sleepovers-

More popular in our ranks than halloween as an excuse to wear make up, are sleepovers...

Where girls tempt the whims of fate and break-out their secret make-up kits all in the name of good clean fun...They tell their parents that the kit is the teenage equivalent of kids playing "House" or "church." But what really happens is a giant game of "How hot would I look if I backslid?"  

And usually the answer is "Not very hot"....because if there is any genre of female who does not know how to put on make up or understand the concept of moderation and restraint when using make up, it is the female apostolic. 

The Horror

Now someone somewhere once said that Girls will be girls. And I understand that. Girls like to have their moment in the sun and Halloween and sleepovers are one of those moments.

And I am completely understanding of this....But my one question is...

Why in God's green earth do you need to post pictures of these "moments" on facebook? 

You wouldn't go to church or walk out in public with the make-up on...so what is the difference between making these pictures of your girly time public for your facebook friends to see?

I am wholly convinced that it is getting to the point where people aren't dressing funny and putting on a horrendous amount of make up anymore just for the sake of having a good time and laughing at each other. Rather, girls and guys a like are dressing funny and putting on a horrendous amount of make up just so they can get their cameras out and take dozens of narcissistic pictures and post them on facebook just so other people can see how good (or ugly) they look when they put on make up....

Speaking of which...

Ladies, stop with the duck face:

#99-Not Facial Hair

"Tradition means giving votes to the most obscure of all classes, our ancestors. It is the democracy of the dead. Tradition refuses to submit to the small and arrogant oligarchy of those who merely happen to be walking about."
                                                       -G.K. Chesterton


I heard this parable once about a 6 year old girl who asked her dad the S-E-X question. Her dad was silent. He then asked his daughter to help him by carrying his suitcase out to his car as he left for work. His daughter walked across the room to the suitcase and tried picking it up, but the suitcase wouldn't budge. She tried lifting the suitcase again, but this time with more effort, yet once again, it was clear that the child was no match for the weight of the suitcase...

The child whined to her daddy that the suitcase was too big for her to carry, and only someone as big as her dad would be able to lift it. Her dad responded, "that's right. And just like you will only be able to handle that suitcase when you are older and bigger, there are also certain questions that are too big for you handle at your age, but when you are bigger, those questions will be light enough for you to carry. And that question you just asked me is one of those questions that is too heavy for you to handle at this time."

The child understood.

Practically Speaking

When I was a child, I asked questions that weren't too heavy for me to lift. They just simply ticked people off. One time I made a Sunday School teacher cry when I asked if God can do anything. She said yes. I then asked if He could make a rock big enough that he could not lift it anymore.

The next question I asked was why women were allowed to talk in church when I Cor. 14:34 and I Timothy 2:11 expressly forbade it (bonus points for it being in the new testament).

But the one that I actually really wanted an answer for....Why can't guys wear facial hair in church?

The standard answer was a half-mumble and ultimately was left with..."Someday you'll understand."

Well I'm 24 now and I think i finally understand....

The typical response goes something along the lines now adays of how in the 1960's, facial hair became a sign of rebellion, and thus we forbade it. And now we just don't want to offend the older generations and the culture they abide by.

I completely agree. If  I must die to my beard wishes in order to please the concerned eyes of the elders, I submit.

A secondary response goes something along the lines of asking if you would go to a job interview with facial hair. And then linking church to a job interview.....

Righty Right....Nothing like letting a job interview be your frame of reference for how your church is to be run...

The rebellious may point out that since we are a holy people who go about our lives with distinction from the world and distinction in gender, what better way to show gender distinction than to let men grow facial hair...

They may point out how in II Samuel 10, how a bunch of Israeli soldiers had their beards cut off from their enemy which was a point of humiliation, and how David would not allow these soldiers back in camp until their beards had grown back...but really who is David really that we need to be applying his precedent?

But as anyone can see, the points of both sides of whether or not facial hair should/ should not be allowed are very conflicting but valid. And I, as a tormented son of the age, want nothing but the truth....

So the same question i asked as a kid of why we couldn't have facial hair in church still arises in my conflicted mind to this day....

But loyal reader and disloyal enemy alike, I believe I have found the answer....of why facial is in no way a good idea for us as Christians representing Christ to the world....

And it revolves around this simply, cliche question....What would Jesus Do?

And aye friend, you may think that Jesus would have had a beard. You may even think that Jesus did have a beard. And while I do not deny this fact, I think our true precedent for Jesus and facial hair should come to the only verse we have about Jesus and facial hair: A prophecy about Him in Isaiah 50:6 that informs us they his beard was plucked by his persecutors. So we know that Jesus had a beard....

But we also know that while He was on the cross, He did not have the beard....

So then the question comes my friend which precedent of Jesus are we to follow?

Jesus with a beard, or beardless Jesus?

And as you and me both know, the cross is our mission, for we must lose our lives and pick up the cross in order to be saved (Matthew 10:38), and with the cross as the height of all Christianity, we must follow the example of the one who stood on that cross...

And of course, it was Jesus without the beard who stood on the cross....

And therein my friends is our answer to why facial hair is a sin....

And also rumor has it that witches themselves understand that there is power behind having your face shaved....

#98- A: New Church Girl Theory (NCGT)-aka New Church Guy Theory. B: New Convert/Church Transfer Theory (NCT/NCTT)

Addendum: The first part is more intended for more of my apostolic peers of dating age (or perhaps if you are married, reflect back on those days when you were in hot pursuit of fellow future Wives and Husbands at youth rallys and in church and what not)

(Please note, in all of the below, the New Girl theory can be changed to the New Guy Theory)

I remember being in fourth grade and we had just gotten back to school from Christmas break and the whispers were making their way around the hallways: There was a new girl in our grade. And she was not just any new girl...she was hot! And as we anxiously waited for our own-first hand testimony of this rumor, we ate up every word from each person who confirmed the reports that we had heard of her attractiveness. Of course there were the naysayers who said the new girl was "alright" or "OK" but who were they to have an opinion anyway?

And then we saw the girl...and the reports were true...she was fantastic! Instantly the new girl was the prize of our grade who every guy wanted to call his girlfriend but were just too uninformed on how exactly to make this happen. She was the hot product for the remainder of the year. And then when we arrived in middle school she was quickly categorized from "hot" to "to be determined" with 40% of all females in the grade on account of the giant grab-bag of girls from all the different elementary schools arriving at once without order. This melting pot going into middle school is one of the most conflicting times for an individual as not only does the individual notl know where they think they stand amongst their peers, but they also don't know who is cool and who is not, and no one wants to pursue the opposite gender below their own social status in their grade. By the second semester of sixth grade the hot new girl from fifth grade was categorized to subpar. All of this without her looks changing that dramatically. What gives?

We may also use this scenario in a more generic sense when literally all four of the hot girls in our elementary school were suddenly downgraded to "kinda cute" after the "To be determined stage" simply because these girls really were not that hot after all. The girls who were once considered hot were easily overwhelmed by the girls who were either a) hotter than those girls or b)new girls

It was only in the context of our aesthetically deprived elementary school were the kinda cute girls considered hot. Hotness is truly relative. And lucky for the "kinda cute" girls, the "hot girls" niche was completely empty for them to fill in elementary school. It was once new girls were introduced into the picture as well as genuinely better looking girls then the "Hot girls" were instantly downgraded to their proper place in attractiveness...

This brings us first to the biggest theory: New Girl Theory-(can be used for guys as well)-New Girls look better than old girls (and we are not talking age). It's kind of like the University of Michigan Law School application where the school adds 25 points to the application simply for being african-american. If you're a new girl, you just automatically have a better chance of being attractive. This means new girls who are kinda cute can be considered hot. Hot girls who are new are considered Supermodel hot. And average new girls are upgraded to being cute.

In such scenarios, no one thinks to test the personality, intellect, or even history of the New Girl (she could be hot, but she could have a lot of baggage). Everyone treats the new girl as if she was a brand new barbie straight out of the package handed to us directly from God....

What this means: If you are new to a setting (if you are the new girl or new guy)-Find your spouse as quick as possible, because unless you really are divine, your attractiveness is going to go gradually down as you stay around longer in the setting (the carbonation will eventually go flat)

As to the New Church Girl Theory (NCGT)-the term we use for someone benefiting from this theory is "Church Girl Hot." such as...

A: Did you see Jim's girlfriend, she is hott.

B: No, she is just Church Girl Hot.

For the NCGT, when a girl or guy walks into church, that girl/guy is instantly considered attractive in some form (unless they are suffering from some bizarre bodily abnormalities). Church and church culture can get pretty monotonous. So when a new girl walks into church, instantly one's pituitary gland creates a remarkably large amount of endorphins in relation to this new female. This process causes your brain to tell you "yo, that female is someone new and could very well be our next future spouse, so we better get a closer look. And until you have had enough time to fully evaluate this possible future spouse, we are going to make her way more attractive than she really is as to cause you to pursue her with all your energy."

The NCG also benefits from a lack of resources of datable girls in the church. So instantly, any form of the opposite gender is going to be an infinite attractive difference than what existed previous her entry into church....or any other words: Your brain has evaluated every female within the church culture and has decided that none of the females are marriage (or date worthy) so any kind of female is better than no datable females....

And this is how we arrive at both the New Girl Theory and the New Church Girl Theory.

New Convert/New Church Transfer Theory

The New Convert Theory or New Church Transfer theory is pretty self-explanatory once introduced to the New Church Girl Theory. Except this theory doesn't take the New Person/Family at church down to an attraction level.

 Simply put everyone loves the new family or couple who transfers from the "Got too conservative/liberal of a church down  the road" to your church, the family who moved because of a job transfer or the new convert in your own church. They're not only a sign of the oncoming revival your church has been anticipating for so long, they are also a mode of validation of your own theology and church in a way, because if they are willing to put 10% of their income on the line and spend it at your church to hear your pastor every Sunday, your church must be doing something right.

But the New Convert/Church Transfer is something so precious. You may not even talk to the new people or you may do so with a over abundance of enthusiasm, but whatever the kind of interaction, you just don't want to ruin them. At the same note you don't want other people in your church to ruin them. You don't want anyone to tell them about standards for the time being as to offend them right out of church. You also don't want them to get the impression that everyone in the church is like crazy guy X who is a very-close talker and talks about weird stuff and greets you with a very over-enthusiastic "praise the Lord." You don't want to pollute the newbies minds as to see them leave the church as quickly as they arrived.

With that said, they are ultimately like a new car that has it's own unique smell for the first year or so after you get into the car (bonus points if it's leather). You really enjoy the novelty of the newness of both the car and new family. But after a while something in your brand starts taking both for granted and you just get used to the smell of the car/look and behavior of the new family and suddenly they aren't so new.

In the new car that turns old, it in a way goes from being something new and different to something that becomes a part of you as the driver and thus something that is a part of you does not have a separate uniqueness to it. In the same way, you get used to the new convert in your church. After a while it's like they have molded into an actual old pillar of the church as you yourself have been for far too long. You know longer see their opinion so precious since most likely their opinion is just like yours as a member of the church fully molded and joined together.....

#97-Having a discussion of when it's the right time to start listening to Christmas Music

Okay, very briefly, I have heard more conversation of when is the right time to listen to Christmas music this year, than I heard of actual Christmas music all of last year. And it's annoying...

Here's the solution:

November 1st-Thanksgiving-It's a gray area. There is no absolute answer about this one. Postmodern young people like myself love gray areas, so the grayness of whether or not Christmas music is okay starting the day after Halloween until Thanksgiving is up for your own personal subjective opinion. And it's up to you to apply your personal opinion in truth. Just don't dare make your personal opinion absolute dogma that other people need to follow and try pulling some random verse meant for poetry in Psalms as a reason God doesn't like you  to listen to Christmas music this early. It's okay to say you have personal convictions that are not in the bible. Just don't get mad when someone who does not have the same personal conviction does the thing that you think God told you was wrong.

 Romans 14/ I Corinthians 8 says whatever conviction we have, follow that conviction unto the Lord, and whatever freedom you have found in Christ, be free in Christ. Stay true that what God has shown you. This means that if you have a personal conviction that Christmas music is wrong during the above time slot then don't compromise. Take the hard-line stance and get along with it. Please don't judge the other weaklings in the process who cannot hold out until the end of November and choose to start listening the moment someone flips over the calendar from October to November. At the same time, don't give in and compromise the truth which you have inherited from older generations after a week and a half into November simply because you saw someone who sings on the church platform drive into church blaring Christmas music. And no, it does not mean the person who listens to church music earlier than you think appropriate has any less of an anointing than you who holds harder convictions.

As for your November 1-Thanksgiving Christmas music listeners, Don't flaunt your newly Found freedom. If you know your brother thinks it is a conviction to listen to such music, don't go blaring the music while you are in that person's company. If you do, it will confuse them and cause them to gossip about you and the liberties you are taking. In short, your freedoms are becoming a stumbling block to others.

Thanksgiving-December 1-Everyone knows it's not a sin to start listening to Christmas music during this time. The minute thanksgiving dinner is over, you are free to listen without hesitation. However, we know that there are some in other churches who take the hardline stance and do think it's a sin to listen to Christmas music before December 1st. Your pastor does not listen to Christmas music during this time as to not offend the other pastors in the area, and he is completely okay with you listening to it though.

December 1 (The Old Guard)-Thank you for carrying on the tradition of the Christmas music of past generations. Without you our denomination would not be able to celebrate the Christmas season like Apostolics do. Without your convictions of trying to be safe rather than sorry when we pull out our Christmas music, our Christmas time would be as muddled looking and bland as those charismatic big building churches down the street who probably started listening to Christmas music at the Fall equinox at the end of September. Perhaps without you, we would be referring to Christmas as X-mas (*gasp*).

But folks, from one early-Christmas music listener to fellow Apostolics, I want to say that I am only listening to it in parts (no more than 15 minutes a day). I am showing some restraint, although I must say that restraint has slowly been slipping a little more every day. But it is nearing Christmas season when we call can celebrate without hesitation, so let's be glad!

#96-Twilight

On the eve of this most tragic evenings, at the dawn of the theatrical release of the newest Twilight installment ("Emperor's New Moon"), I thought it best we pay homage to the one of the most confusing infiltrations of Apostolic culture since Whitney Houston did the Preacher's Wife....


First, let me be the first to say that I have never seen Twilight. I am not fond of vampires. I am not fond of vegetarians. And I hate people who sparkle when the sunlight hits them. I am therefore am especially not a fan of vegetarian vampires who sparkle in the sunlight.


Personally I would have been satisfied with the whole "romantic-vampire" genre being retired after the atrocities of Interview with the Vampire/Buffy the Vampire Slayer (the movie)..... But hey, who am I to judge?


That said, I have some distinct memories when Twilight first entered the apostolic scene: First, it had come on the heels of the conclusion of the Harry Potter saga, and we all know a primary purpose of the Harry Potter series was to compromise our precious apostolic truth by polluting the minds of our innocent youth through tales of witchery and sorcery and emo-looking boy witches.

That said, the question was, while Harry Potter was an obvious taboo for Apostolics all over, was the swithcheroo of witches for effeminate vegtarian vampires a simple subversive satanic ploy to imprison the minds of our dear children all the more so? After all what is wrong with vampires? And Romance? But we all knew what was really happening, the devil was in the details, and the details was Edward Cullen. 


Of course ultimately, we came to realize that in terms of morally, there was nothing wrong with Twilight. The ones who seemed to consider Twilight bad in a spiritual sense were probably the same people who thought the Lord of the Rings trilogy as demonic (despite it being a very Christian story by a very Christian author)....


Another hilarious observation was for the first few months after the movie came out, there was the distinction between the true elitist Twilight fans who actually read the book by Stephanie Meyer (complete with weird chess piece cover) and the the bandwagon fans who were satisfied with the movie alone. It was like the book readers were completely embarrassed by the amount of mass popularity of Twilight so they had to find someway to separate themselves and that arrived in the form of something to the effect of "the book is sooooo much better. I don't even think Edward Cullen is that cute."


That said, 
So what IS so fascinating about the storyline about the movie and apostolics? Sure it maintains worldwide success, but Lord knows that it has been surprisingly successful amongst apostolic females everywhere.


So what is up with the popularity? 


To be fare and balanced (like Fox News (chuckle))..... I have decided to let a self decribed twilight fan, Rachel Tripolone all the way from Sydney, Australia explain why she believes the Twilight series so popular amongst our endearing Apostolic young ladies who strive for nothing but God's will in their life (including prince Charming):

Well the very fact that it is more of an impossible romance story than all about fangs and blood… although there are vampire themes. It’s a boy meets girl story with a supernatural twist. Plus there are moral and social lessons to be learnt from Twilight; lessons such as accepting the ‘different’ kinds of people in our social networks/lives and rejecting the 'different' people that aren't helpful to our journey. Also, they take a totally different approach to being a Vampire. I mean, they’re vegetarian vampires for crying out loud.  This family of Vampires chose not to eat humans in order to eliminate any stereotype of traditional vampires as blood sucking monsters.

Plus, I think it’s the theme of a Bad vampire guy who’s not really a bad vampire at all… he’s a good vampire!So I guess… the girls are attracted to guys that seem bad or that were bad… and now are good. (I suppose that’s what the apostolic girls want in an apostolic man) If that makes sense? Girls feel a certain sympathy towards Edward as he didn't have a choice when he became a vampire. PLUS, there's another character (jacob Black - he's a werewolf) which makes this an interesting, yet twisted, love-triangle; and let's face it every girl wants to be fought over by multiple of guys.

Apostolic girls enjoy it because I guess it’s more about the lack of sexual themes/scenes that are ‘normally’ in a love story. There are also references to abstaining while in the relationship- so I guess that’s always a brownie point with Christian Girls. (Why do you think the Jonas Brothers are also a big hit?)

However, to set a myth straight, Twilight does not specifically say that Edward Cullen is a virgin, although the author depicts this character to be ‘old-fashioned’ and he declines Bella’s invitation to make babies before they are officially married. :) Which suggests that the fictional male character also has the utmost respect for the female character hence their love is stronger and more passionate without making love in the end book, once they are finally married (Sorry to kill it for you readers).

At that note the dear friend decided to go on a one sentence tirade of how absurd it was that I could blog about a film/book that I have never watched/read, but yet I could form concrete cynical opinions about....


And I guess there are some things each one of us would rather stand ignorant of and as a result be judgmental over without ever actually understanding that thing. I simply chose to be ignorant of sparkling vampires...


In conclusion: Edward the vampire is so popular not just because of his devilishly good looks but also because he has a heart and has some strong personal standards that he will not compromise. Now if only he was called to be a pastor, and then we'd end up with the perfect Apostolic-guy...

#95- Using "apostolic" and/or "pentecostal" as adjectives to decribe arbitrary nouns

 Housekeeping note:  First, expect to see posts from a 4th blogger on the site...Kyle Brown. I don't know much about him but know that he will be a valuable voice within this community complete with snarky commentary on anything you may witness at your local church culture..


to the post...

The following is quoted directly from a friend ...

Using the words "apostolic" and/or "pentecostal" as adjectives to decribe arbitrary nouns as if declaring something "apostolic/pentecostal" increases the overall value of that thing.
For example...Apostolic worship, Pentecostal singing, or We're going to to to the restaurant to eat "apostolic pentecostal" style....
Apostolic pepsi
Apostolic clothing
Apostolic pentecostal marriage

Also:  sometimes words like "charasmatic", "baptist", "secular",  is used as an adjective to decrease the value of a noun.
For example a preacher may, when trying to probe for a clap or amen, say....  I know i'm not in a "Baptist" service tonight!
Or, someone describing someone's look may say... She dresses like she's "Charasmatic", she needs to get a more "apostolic" wardrobe...


I am completely on board with this one...essentially the terms "Apostolic" or "Pentecostal" are becoming trump cards to maintain a mysterious kind of  superiority over other kinds of competing mechanisms, be it contrasting old fashion Apostolic preaching with  the dullness of a methodist lecture, an Apostolic hair style with a kind of secular looking hair style, or even contrasting Apostolic mountain climbing with secular mountain climbing (see picture)....


If you ever want to win an argument...simply talk down to the opposing argument as being "Charismatic" and maintaining that your argument is the "Apostolic way"...which really means that if Paul were here to do, he would be supporting you in an argument over the other argument, no matter how much actual scripture is mentioned....

#94-E-Mail forwards about naive and/or dying children, courageous soldiers, and how atheists are kicking God out of America

I don't understand this phenomenon and it's been around since the beginning of the internet...

Basically all these chain e-mail forwards look like are old geocity websites made into an e-mail complete with a handful of useless GIF images of angels.......

As referenced in the title, all these chain-emails revolve around is either

• A story about a child dying with cancer whose life can be saved by every e-mail you forward, 
• A cute story of an innocent child having a distorted perception of the world that makes you say awwww (such as a child giving blood to someone in need but thinking the giving of the blood would actually kill the giving child).
• The dangers of universal health care.
• A story that quotes a letter from a soldier in Iraq about how sick the soldiers are of the liberals who hate George Bush and how appreciative the soldiers are of support and how they love America.
• A story about how a law is being proposed that will take even more prayer out of schools, God out of the pledge of allegiance, how Obama is a socialist, and how the Founding Fathers wanted everyone to have the holy ghost, and how the government is trying to ban bibles everywhere.
• A completely illogical argument about an atheist professor bullying his students only to be completely embarrassed. (quite similar to the equally false story about Einstein calling his atheist teacher out about Evil being the absence of God argument)

In response to these E-mails you are asked to show your support for either dying children, childhood innocence, America, the American flag, the soldiers who risk their lives in Iraq, and God. You are to offer such support by forwarding the e-mail to an X number of recipients.

If you do not forward such e-mails you are supporting cancer, killing children, supporting terrorism, and hating God. If you are not the solution by forwarding the stories, you are part of the problem by not passing the stories on.

But really what all this amounts to is that there is a giant conspiracy theory for God-hating democrats to take over the world and they do this by killing as many soldiers as possible by allowing terrorists to roam Iraq and America freely and also kill as many children as possible by forcing them to stop praying in school and start receiving universal health care that in reality gives them cancer and autism by all the needles that are given through this universal health care.

And all of the above make the e-mail forwarder feel that it is their sole responsibility to save America and God by obeying the forwarding demands of the e-mail.

It does not matter if the stories are completely made up (who cares about www.snopes.com), we are going to believe them true and thus allow these e-mails to create a false sense of paranoia in our lives about the ever-increasing reality of the destruction of God in our century....and we're going to do our part....Just click Forward to everyone in your addressbook....

What I ultimately want to know is who is the creep writing these emails? What sick and twisted condition are they in to actually get a kick out making up a story about how Janet Reno thinks Christians are in a cult  Who thinks of these things? And will the world actually explode if all the email forwards stop?

And if you are one of those e-mails forwarders who spends your mornings and afternoons dropping off and picking up your kids from school, and in between you are reading and forwarding stories sent to you from your Aunt Martha who really thinks all the internet is good for is for e-mailing forwarded stories....my advice to you is, please stop....

There is nothing worse than having to take a few seconds out of each and every day to open up a forwarded e-mail about some missionary who is in a prison from some foreign government and to scroll down and to see that if I don't witness to my friends about this missionaries story, then I will find out that when I get to judgement day I will find out that God stopped forgiving my sins....

#93-Handkerchiefs

Handkerchiefs may seem like an insignificant church extra at first glance (unlike ties and, in some places, pantyhose) but, in fact, they are used for several holy, distinctly Apostolic purposes. Here are three of the most significant reasons Apostolics like handkerchiefs:

Wiping Off Preacherly Sweat

The true worth of a message is measured by the amount of sweat produced by the deliverer. Especially if it's a convention speaker. C'mon. We Apostolics know good and well that if going to a convention, especially if we had to travel a little ways to get there, we didn't go to hear some man (and it's always a man, unless it's Ladies' Conference or something) give a calm lecture. We went to hear the preacher preach. Youknaaimsayin? And when the preacher preaches, really preaches, there will be stomping, there will be yelling, there will be heavy breathing (directly into the mic), but most of all, there will be sweat. No preacher worth his salt would dare grace the hallowed platform without his handkerchief to whip out to mop his brow in medias res.

The Wave Offering

Before the preacher gets into the message, a holy hush may wash over the congregation. More often than not, it's in the wake of a song that "ushers in" the spirit of worship. (Note: Fast songs usher in the spirit of praise, slow songs usher in the spirit of worship.) After a few spiritual shivers, the service leader or the preacher himself may give a general call for a "wave offering" unto the Lord. Since it's unlikely anyone would have barley sheaves or hunks of ram shoulder on hand to wave around in the air, most people will just move their hands to and fro. But the truly sanctified among us who are prepared to do wave offerings the right way will pull out handkerchiefs. There's just something about waving around a white handkerchief that makes things more dignified and righteous.

Hankies for the Sick

And God wrought special miracles by the hands of Paul: So that from his body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs or aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the evil spirits went out of them (Acts 19: 11-12).

Some of us do exactly what this scripture says and send handkerchiefs to those who are sick. In my neck of the woods, we anoint them and pray over them first (a slight addition to the Acts account) and off the sanctified hankie goes to do its thing. (Though we know it's not the handkerchief itself that has any power . . . right? . . . right?)

Handkerchiefs, may you assume your rightful place among needful Apostolic church paraphernalia.

#92-The Early Approacher

The sermon is wrapping up. The preacher has asked you all to stand. He’s making his final comments and…what’s this? It appears conviction has settled upon the audience to such a great degree that one young chap can no longer wait. He goes for it. He slowly makes his stride toward the altar as the preacher continues. And then another. The another.

All the while you’re left standing in your pew pondering. “Do I go? Do I stay? Do I wait for the official call? I don’t want to look backslidden, but I don’t want to look over eager either. What to do, what to do.”

Such instances regularly occur at convocations where numerous church congregations are gathered together, but not necessarily in every church on and individual basis. The over-enthused young gentleman is not a novelty of every church, like the sleeper, but he does exist in one out of three, at least.

From whence does his charisma/enthusiasm come? Is it a desperate conviction laid forth by the Word that just went forth? Is he hoping to catch the gleaning eye of potential future mates in attendance? Is he slow? One may never know the reason for the early approacher’s early approach but we do know this: he, not the preacher, decides when the altar call will be, and this right is to be cherished.

(Side note: Joel said not to be too sarcastic or demeaning, as my humor tends to be quite confrontational, but I can’t help but ask the reason for the following:
WHY is there always one young lass who always lays down at the altar? Everyone else knees or stands but it seems there’s always one overly dramatic boy who can’t touch Heaven without his face three inches from hell. Maybe it’s just a local thing, but I’ve always wondered, because I never really have the desire to sprawl out on the floor, but maybe that’s just me. Any opinions?)

#91-Thinking We're Not a Denomination

It's a Sunday night, and the preacher has gotten into that part of his sermon where he's off the platform, roaming the altar area, and starting to take tentative strides into the pew area. No matter what he's preaching, you know he's about to say it. In your head you start counting down: 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 and . . .

"There are people out there, sitting in the pews of denominal churches who are lost because they don't know the truth! We ain't a denomination, a denomination's just part of the whole. We got the the whole truth! I thank God for the revelation of who He is! I thank God I received the infilling of the Holy Ghost at a Pentecostal altar --"

*record scratch* Okay, stop right there. Hol' up, preacher. You said we ain't a denomination, but a breath later you described the type of altar at which you got the Holy Ghost as a distinctly Pentecostal one. Since when did Pentecostal (or Apostolic, in staying with accordance to the title of this blog) become synonymous with "non-denominational"?

Let's face it. We don't hold to a nebulous cloud of nondescript beliefs. If we're proud to be one God Apostolic tongue talking holy rollin born again believers in the liberating power of Jesus' na-ame, then let's have the guts to admit we belong to a denomination. A distinct part of the "easy believism"-saturated whole of mainstream Christianity.

C'mon, we can't have it both ways. We can't sing "I'm a Pentecostal" while at the same time pretend that it's somehow unlike delineating oneself as Baptist or Methodist or Presbyterian or Episcopalian. We can't hold to Apostolic "distinction" and "identity" and "heritage" and then cover our ears while saying "la-la-la-la-la" (not an imitation of speaking in tongues, by the way) when it comes to the D word.

And speaking of words, and being a word nerd, I can't resist pointing out the homiletic misuse of the word "denominal." According to Merriam-Webster:

denominal adj. - Derived from a noun.

For example, Google is a proper noun. If one were then to say, "I googled the definition of denominal," the word 'googled' would be described as a denominal verb. In other words, a verb derived from a noun. Or in other words, nothing to do with denominations.

#90-Hooker Boots (before passing judgements on terminology please see the fine print below)

 Fine Print:Okay so I know the term "hooker boots" is inevitably going to offend some people. Lord knows that if I was from some rural environment who has found his little utopia in the small town nearby and their local church, whose size ranges from 50-100 people I would probably be offended too because hookers seem so depressingly dirty and unclean and promiscuous and obscene and invasive and capitalistic   and therefore should avoid every reference to them.....

A little bigger print: That said, I have wanted to write about this topic for a quite some time ever since this was recommended by a reader, but I struggled with the proper terminology and wording that encompasses the fact that the picture above is a visual element of a pair of boot-shoes that gained their notoriety and fame and influence directly from the prostitutes that frequent our ghetto's, brothels, shady joints that pollute our towns, and any other visual dungeon of our civilization.We don't want to be reminded that such people exist so we don't like terms that reference them. That said, the boots above are popular now in our churches and they owe their influence indirectly from these prostitutes. I am uncomfortable to use the term "hooker" in this blog but there is no better term to describe the above shoes than "hooker boots." I even made a facebook status asking for a more politically correct term for hooker boots, and while there were a few helpful suggestions, none of them were as direct and concise and poignant as "hooker boots." That said, I ask you to withhold judgment on such usage...We must also remember that the  prophets and the gospel writers themselves showed no restraint in referencing these harlots/whores/tramps,  etc...

Regular Print: I don't know if any of you remember, or even had contact with a trend that tried ambushing the UPC somewhere in the mid 90's....Teenagers left and right began not only wearing ridiculously baggy jeans (Most likely from a brand called JNCO), but these teenagers thought it appropriate and attractive to sag these baggy jeans to the point that one's underwear was showing as these guys walked around thinking this is the best way to land a girlfriend.

But James Dobson was not having any of that....Him and a few others saw that the saggy pants should be off-limits everywhere within the Lord's Kingdom, and promptly pointed our eyes in the right direction to the fact that the trend of sagging one's pants began in prison.....as an invitation of sorts to fellow prison mates....(trying not to be too vulgar)...This immediately put an end to the pant sagging in our churches, but knowing it's origins it's any wonder how such a trend ever ended up in our churches to begin with.

If anything the pant sagging trend showed a strong weakness in our tendency to isolate ourselves from culture and the awareness thereof: We can let things/trends enter the front door of our churches completely oblivious of the connotations that these trends may be referencing that would be much easier to pick up if one was just a little more culturally aware of our environment outside ourselves.

It can be a dangerous price to pay for working hard to maintain your own sense of communal identity separate from those around you...

But I mentioned the 90's sagging pants trend to say that the popular Apostolic trend of "hooker boots" is no different....The boots have walked right into our church simply because they seem to go well with skirts? I don't know, but I do know that hookers in short skirts are the source of these leather boots and we seem to be either completely clueless of their origins or perhaps we are seeing the weirdest marriage of "opposites attracting" wherein the conservative Apo-Pento's take their fashion cues from the most heinous sector's of the secular realm: The Prostitutes.

The strange thing is, some could argue very justifiably that these hooker boots are incredibly modest because they show less calf than typical shoes would when worn with a skirt....Okay, cool....

But what you ladies who wear the hooker boots need to explain  is how in the world you get those things on? I know it's not as easy as slipping slipper on...I myself experienced a nightmare come true at the mall last week when I mistakenly tried on a pair of jeans that were for sale at Urban Outfitters only to be horrified when I tried them on to find out they were skinny jeans! And the hardest part about putting skinny jeans on was not lifting them up around the thigh, but rather lifting them up around the ankles and calves....And if I struggled to put those skinny jeans on (one of the awkward moments of my life whose memories I would choose to forget if I could), I know you females struggle all the more so with those hooker boots....

So what's the deal? Why are they here?

Theologically speaking, should the origins of the trend dictate whether or not they are permissible in church?

I don't know and I really don't care....

It's just weird....

But it gets weirder....

The first lady of Christianity, Sarah Palin...

She gets down with the Hooker boots as well....

Like what kind of sick and twisted world is this when Miss "I heard she was baptized in the name of Jesus and spoke in tongues" is caught taking her footwear cues from the local STD distribution centers aka Prostitutes....

#89-Hairspray

This post was recommended by an anonymous source....

There is a saying I am about to make up, that I would like to attribute to some famous UPC preacher...

"When we start to leave the hairspray off our heads, we start leaving the Jesus out of our hearts."

Think about it...before the hair cutting, before the wearing of pants, what is the first thing that really goes for a prospective female back slider? They stop caking the hair spray on their head. They stop with the whole doing your hair up, and just start letting their hair down (if you're a female). The male usually just lets his hair grow out instead of doing his hair like with a well hair-spray sealed parting of hair (like Ted Coppel) or spiking it like he was a new evolutionary form of a hedgehog. In essence they stop caring so much about what they look like at church, and the hair spray is the first indicator of this Pentecostal hair styling apathy.

The anonymous contributor described her and her husband's always growing fondness of hairspray,
"We use a ton of it and we have tried every brand (when in the drugstore w/ a non-Christian friend she noted that I had a story behind each brand…… too sticky, nozzle always clogs up etc.  It even seems A/P men use it more than their worldly counterparts.  My husband came to the truth a couple of years ago and had never thought of using the stuff.  But recently he has asked for his own can of hairspray.  Brought me to tears.

Yes, he’s really Apostolic now!"

Which brings me to this point.....Have you ever meant a coffee efficienado (sp?)? To me Coffee tastes like coffee (and i love coffee). The smells may be different and the tastes may vary slightly, but to me all coffee tastes way more similar than different....but yet there are coffee experts who swear there are strong flavor differences and the region which the beans come from dictate the essence of coffee flavor...(sidenote: I can't stand food and beverage snobs who make flavor distinctions of the utmost importance to dignify their eating sense of elitism...such vulgar and discontent people.)

Well the above commentator on hair spray got me thinking...is hairspray our one product where we can decipher small differences in substance that the rest of the world could care less about?

Three more questions:

• What would our general conferences and conventions be without hairspray? Seriously, not only are all conventions and conferences made or broken with whispering and open conversations of who did what with their hair (only made possible by hair spray and prayer), but also a good 12.5% of all our time at these events is spent doing our hair with that magic of all magical vessels: The hair spray bottle (male and female included).....
• Are Apostolics the environmentalists worst enemy? I really wonder how much O-zone destruction Apostolics have done as a denomination with the uncountable Hair spray bottles we go through just to make sure our hair is absolutely perfect.... 
• How many Holy Ghost Praythroughs Have been hindered sincerely by hairspray? Seriously, Lord knows how many men and women have contemplated getting involved in the altar call only to have flashes of the 2 hours they spent before services making their hair just right with the proper "swooshing angle" across their forehead and once at the altar call, surely some inconsiderate elder will squash all the hair awesomeness with a forceful open hand to the top of our head...And if this were not to happen, what if God tarries and we are provoked to make some dancing gestures of jerking back and forth and intense sweating that will inevitably cause our hair to end in a state of unrecognizable, unfixable chaos?  So we let our hair remain in tact and our spiritual life in flux...
  

#88-The Church Sleeper

The Battle

One of the greatest challenges in life is entering a church service with less than 4 hours of sleep under your belt and trying to stay awake the entire service...

The battles between staying awake or dozing off for a few z's during church can be quite momentous....Usually the first question before engaging in battle is whether or not the battle is even worth it....if you are wise, you sit in the back corner of the sanctuary where face time to other people is minimal. So if you do fall asleep, a few people at most will be able to spot your error....

But for most of us, this luxury is not realistic for we as young people do not want to be thought of as on the way out church backsliders, for only on the way out-church backsliders really sit in the dark crevices, clefts, and back rows of the sanctuary ... and this brings about the battles between sleep and awake, death and life, being worldly or being holy.

We struggle, we wrestle, we find our eyelids fading fast over our eyeballs....we even try different strategies to find the right arm angle to support our tired heads and block potential sleep-catchers should we accidentally fall asleep.

Of course the worst kind of losing battle in church is when we do not have any head support and our heads bob slowly down in front of us as we fall into the great abyss of sleep, and in one traumatic instance our body mistakes our head falling as our entire body being violently thrown into the depths of hell, so our body convulses and jerks back up like lightning from heaven, which of course makes us become awake, and wondering how noticeable our head jerk into consciousness was to those around us.....

You quickly glance around, and see that no one notices that we were sleeping....except for those 1-2 people staring at us smiling and giggling at you....30 seconds later, your fighting the battle all over....

The Champion of our Hearts

I said all of the above to say this...

There is one amongst us who is more courageous than us all...

He sees the potential battle between consciousness and sleep within a church service and is honest with himself and his environment from the get go and knows the cause is a losing effort.

So before the battle even begins, this champion forfeits all rights of battle and elects to go where only a few have the guts to go to:

Unrepentant, non-secretive, heavy nap sleeping during church.

And it's not once in a blue moon this champion chooses to sleep roughly 90% of the sermon length, but rather quite consistently...

Like almost every service consistently...This man/woman is the church sleeper.....

 

Every church has one...should you be part of the unfortunate church who does not have one, I suggest you go to your local elementary school's 4th grade play and find the one man who above all else is crouched in his chair completely immune to the noise and commotion around him of loud children and corny jokes, and sleeps his little heart out...

And these church sleepers....as hinted at above, their church sleeping is no joke...The kind of sleep they find themselves in appears to be those rare kind of deep sleeps that only God himself and Hurricane Katrina could intervene....

The last question I have is this....judging from the genuine lack of any paranoia of being caught sleeping in church whatsoever from the church sleeper, I wonder if these church sleepers show up in church for the sole purpose of knowing it is the one place in this messy world where they know they can receive the appropriate amount of soothing sermonizing and shelter that some need to fall asleep.

And thus, if the above is true, I argue that the church has found just one more ministry that it provides for the lonely and scared populations of our society: A place of not only spiritual rest, but also physical rest as well....

And that is why I think each church should provide the sleep ministry that is closely integrated with the leg-covering ministry for those slain in the spirit. Wherein the church does not charge the church sleeper(s) to sleep in it's pew during service (where as a hotel would charge to let a guest sleep in it's room) and further provides the sleeper with a blanket and pillow to use during service....

In exchange for this service/ministry, it is the church sleeper who is required to place the blankets and sheets  and what not on top of those slain in the spirit. Perhaps the church sleeper could place a few pillows under the heads of those slain when he/she is not using them to get their nap on...

Just a thought...