A Review Of Ruth Rieder Harvey's "Reflecting The Glory"

by Lois E. Gibson

Reflecting The Glory

Introductory Thoughts

The teachings of Ruth Rieder Harvey have long created a controversy within the United Pentecostal Church and other Apostolic churches. She took the basic teaching, that a woman is not to cut her hair, to a new level that some have likened to witchcraft, calling the doctrine "magic holy hair." (Even UPC minister and evangelist Lee Stoneking will proclaim to you that witches understand the power they have in their hair and Apostolics need to do the same. If witches could cast spells, what could our women do?) An importance is given to hair that is non-existent in the Bible, despite Rieder's attempts to sometimes back this teaching with scripture. It was no longer enough to simply teach that women should not cut their hair. Now women are being told they have special importance, power and protection and are the guardians of God's glory.

These teachings have created a hardship for women and have caused great anguish and a shaking of faith for some, who in trusting these teachings- that somehow their uncut hair provides protection to their family- have had things happen that they believe should not have transpired since they followed the doctrine.

These teachings read so much into the Bible as well as distort what is there. Meanings are given to passages that were never intended or insinuated. It brings about a situation of spiritual abuse as a burden is placed upon the woman and it all revolves around her protecting and keeping her hair forever uncut or dire consequences may follow. It causes many to become prideful and to trust in their works. It gives many a false sense of security.

To anyone yet caught up in these teachings, here is some food for thought. If hair is so essential that the devil himself focuses on it in an attempt to "eradicate God's image," why is there absolutely nothing written about this in the Old Testament? There are no directives from God to the Jewish women to never cut their hair. There are no teachings stating that hair length is a vitally important matter. According to Ruth, this wasn't something that originated in New Testament times.

Why are none of these "truths" proclaimed in the New Testament? Why didn't Paul come out and say that the believer's hair is God's glory? Why didn't Peter write about how Lucifer will tempt women to cut their hair because it will distort "God's image and eternal plan"? Why didn't Jesus teach that "man's short hair and the woman's long hair are reflections of God's glory"? Why did Luke neglect to write that dying ones hair would alter "His image in your life" and His "master design will be marred"?

I could go on with numerous additional examples of what is stated in this book. If hair is so vitally important, and carries such significance, wouldn't this be very clearly stated repeatedly in the Bible? This is a valid question.

In the book, "Reflecting The Glory" by United Pentecostal Church minister Ruth Rieder Harvey, she states that man was to reflect God's image and a woman would reflect the Church. She says that "short hair or the uncovered head identifies men while long hair or the covered head characterizes a woman's feminine appearance." (Here is something else to ponder. This certainly is not representative of all cultures over all time. Why is North America used by many as the seal of approval and standard for all times and cultures? )

The author believes that the devil tries to destroy God's image & that "God's image and eternal plan are distorted" in destroying the distinct roles of men and women. With the sexes looking similar, Ruth claims that behind it is a "hidden agenda," "the eradication of God's image."

Ruth Harvey then shares that our hair "is indicative of our relationship with God." Lucifer, having been the "covering" cherub, realizes how important hair is & because of this, believers "must seek to protect the power that God has invested in us. ...We must beware of any action on our part that would distort the reflection of God's glory." A convoluted story of what Lucifer did, how he fell, and how believers took his place in regard to God's glory is taught.

Chapter One: It Takes Time, Effort, and Sacrifice To Dig These Teachings Out Of The Bible?

The first chapter of this book describes days of gold mining, how difficult it was and how people gave their life or were injured in pursuit of it. This is compared to truths of the Bible. It is claimed that these "do not lie on the surface for the halfhearted soul to pick up and casually toss aside." Ruth teaches that these truths are given only to those who determine to know God and who seek for Him with all their heart, intensely pursuing Him.

The message this conveys, and it is needful in an effort to support all that is taught, is that if you don't get these "truths" it is because you are not fully pursuing God and perhaps are not determined to know Him. Maybe you are the "halfhearted soul" that would casually toss them aside. These holiness standards are allegedly deep things that are not seen on the surface of the Bible. A problem with this is that the deep things that are taught in this book are neither found on the "surface" of the Bible, nor its depths.

"The holiness questions that confront the modern day Church are no surprise to God because He knows the end from the beginning. All the answers are contained in His Word; however, it will take time, effort, and sacrifice to extract them from God's gold mine. It will be necessary to dig deeply for these riches."

Please ponder the above quote from Ruth Harvey's book. Does it make sense? If there are distinct ways in which God wishes for us to live, why would they be hidden somehow in the Bible, to where they could only be discovered after much "time, effort, and sacrifice"? Would not God make them plain?

If we look at the subject of lying, we can easily find where it is judged as wrong in the Bible. In numerous places, we clearly see that those who follow God should not lie and that if we live a life full of lies, we are not following God. You don't need to take much time to discover this biblical truth.

Likewise, if we look at stealing, we can find mention of it in numerous places and it takes little effort to discover that God does not want those who follow Him to steal from others.

There are a number of similar things that do not require sacrifice on our part to see them clearly taught. We need not spend weeks or months or years in discovering these biblical truths in order to know how God wants us to conduct our lives. We don't even need Bible dictionaries or to investigate the original Greek or Hebrew words as they are clearly and repeatedly proclaimed throughout the Bible.

Think about this and then ponder again what I quoted from the book. Why would God require us to have to "dig deeply" to discover how he desires for us to live? Would God hide those things simply because someone might come along, read about them and because they are "halfhearted" they toss them aside? Really? Do God's feelings get hurt so easily? Would this cause him to basically hide how he wants people to live- from those who wish to follow Him? Punish believers because some will toss these things aside? Just the thought of God deliberately making it difficult to find things that are matters of salvation because some might toss them aside is repulsive to me.

God does not hide these things from those who follow Him. He does not make their path hard in this. He does not require that they have to sacrifice and take much time and effort in order to know what He thinks about how they are to live. However, you WILL have to do those things as well as read into the scripture, take things out of context and distort passages in order to follow the teachings found within this book.

Try it for yourself. If you have a concordance (if not, they can be found online to use for free), pick a subject such as lying. See how quickly anyone may easily discover what God thinks about it. Try stealing or drunkenness or a number of other topics.

Then see if you can just as easily find in the Bible where it states the things that are taught in this book.

Chapter Two: You Replaced Lucifer And Must Protect And Reflect God's Glory

Chapter two of the book is where the reader is introduced to a very twisted and distorted teaching regarding Lucifer and how man was created to essentially replace the role he had. You will not find the teaching in any Bible in any version, despite biblical quotations seen in the book. Ruth Harvey uses these thoughts and intricately intertwines them into various holiness teachings, making them much more important and essential than initially taught by others.

In it, she speaks about angels, specifically Gabriel and Michael. Then she spends her time on Lucifer. (For those unaware, the word lucifer is only mentioned one time in the entire KJV and some believe it was not an actual name. There is more to this that I will not get into as it would cause this review to be much longer.) She shares that his outward appearance differed from all other angels and that no other angel could compare to him.

She then speaks about God being Spirit and that "He manifests His glory in a distinct fashion." She tries to say that God is light, fire is a form of light, and uses this line of thought to teach that God "manifests his glory in the form of light." And it is all tied into Lucifer. Ruth teaches that Lucifer would praise God in music as the worship leader in heaven and ministered before God in the midst of stones of fire. The music he played "would invoke the manifestation of God's glory. When the light of God's glory descended, it came in contact with Lucifer's jeweled covering, resulting in a kaleidoscope of brilliant color. What an awesome sight it must have been to see the most beautiful creature ever created reflecting the glory of the Lord as he ministered in worship before the throne of God!" Believing the author's teaching on this is key to understanding how the holiness teachings get taken to a different level. Thus, chapter two of the book is very significant and important.

She goes on to claim that Lucifer was "to protect the glory of God, which he reflected." Ruth tells of his fall and pride/mutiny against God. Here is where another key to the teaching is seen when she claims, "Pride over outward appearance birthed deception, iniquity, and violent rebellion against God."

Since God kicked Lucifer out of heaven, Rieder states that there was now "no one to reflect the glory." She asks what God would create to take over the role Lucifer had and then quotes from Genesis 1:27 and claims that man would now "reflect God's glory" and he was created in "His own image." This is where the thought of image takes on an important role and she teaches that Lucifer always goes around trying to "destroy God's image and to replace it with his own." This is why holiness is so important, as he uses music and pride in appearance to accomplish his agenda.

She ties it all up in sharing how believers are to be lights and our good works are a godly, separated lifestyle. "The wondrous privilege of worshiping the Creator and reflecting His glory was taken from the "Son of the Morning" and bestowed upon the "Sons of God." We are "illuminators of God's glory," according to her.

It is upon all of this that the author rests the need and absolute importance to follow all of the accompanying holiness teachings. Lucifer fell due to pride in his appearance and this is how he attacks. Now as believers we take his place in protecting the glory of God and reflecting God's glory. Failure to follow all the holiness rules would mean we are neglecting to protect God's glory and of course would not be reflecting it. This would be a very serious matter were it true.

Prior to reading this book, I had never seen such twisting and distortion used to attempt to persuade people, particularly women, to follow outward standard teachings. I had definitely heard the basic teachings, but never with the thought thrown in that we are protectors and guardians of God's glory and have the role Lucifer once had. It takes these teachings to an entirely different level, with much more at stake should one fail to follow.

Chapter Three: Severe Consequences - Fear Rears Its Ugly Head

She attempts in chapter three to support the hair teaching by saying "it all starts at the top." Some additional statements about God's glory are made in an effort to further convince women of the importance of following these standards.

How it starts at the top, according to Ruth, is when a person was anointed with oil in the Bible, it was always poured on the head & it flowed down to the skirts of the garment. She claims in this same manner, the reflection of God's glory begins at the top and flows downward. This is how she attempts to support the importance of the hair teaching. It is taught that our hair is "indicative of our relationship with God."

At the end of this chapter, more fear is shared when it is claimed that there are "two things that you should never touch- God's vengeance and glory." Should a person not handle the glory of God properly, there will be "severe consequences." Ruth admonishes us to "vigilantly defend the glory resting on our heads" and again ties this in with the chapter title of "It All Starts at the Top."

There are four scriptures she uses to support her statement that we should never touch God's glory and not one of them ever states this. Isaiah 42:8 & 48:11 simply say that God will not give his glory to another. 1 Corinthians 1:29 only says that no flesh should glory in his presence. Acts 12:21-23 is the story of when Herod accepted the praise of the people as if his was the voice of God. He died because he did not give God the glory. In no way are any of these passages saying that one should never "touch" God's glory. I won't cover the passages she gives for God's vengeance as they don't really relate to this teaching on hair.

By tying in the story of Herod with a woman's hair, the author is using a fear tactic. Fear permeates the teachings in unhealthy churches and is a major factor in spiritual abuse. Instead of simply teaching her beliefs that a woman should never cut or dye her hair, she adds the threat of dire consequences should one not comply. Herod died. Lucifer was kicked out of heaven. This is very serious stuff.

In this chapter she also teaches that it is wrong to dye your hair. She shares two passages where the hair of God's head was described as "white like wool" and states God chose white as his hair color and that it is "symbolic of His total and complete purity." (She seems to forget that God is spirit and as such he is not made of flesh as us humans.) As your hair color changes with age, supposedly it also symbolizes "the purity of your faith." Thus, we are then a "greater reflection of God's glory."

To further support the teaching that hair is not to be dyed, it is said that "we know that the man's short hair and the woman's long hair are reflections of God's glory." (Thus the title of the book, Reflecting God's Glory.) In this, the passage in Proverbs 16:31 is distorted to teach that the hair "transcends to a new level of beauty" as it whitens. She claims this is our "royal headdress" and as we get older, we "become a greater reflection" of God due to the change in our hair color. The message given is it's becoming more like God's hair color.

There are no passages that teach it is wrong or a sin to dye your hair. There are no passages that teach it is wrong or a sin for a woman to cut her hair. (For more detailed writing on the hair issue, see my other articles.) It is one thing to teach that these things are wrong for a Christian to do. It is another to claim there will be "serious consequences" if you do not comply. And it is yet another when a teaching is invented to claim that we must protect God's glory as we are now in the place of Lucifer, reflecting God's glory and that we do this through our hair.

Chapter Four: Make-up Veils God's Glory With A Face of Deception

"In his quest to destroy God's image, the devil assumes many disguises."

"STOP!! Before you buy into his lies, let us unmask the origin of the art of artifice."

"The world wants us to veil the glory so they will not be reminded of a holy God who judges sin."

"The glory of God can only reflect in a face free of deception. We do not need cosmetics to enhance our appearance. ...Don't ever veil the glory!"

We now move from hair to make-up in chapter four. In an attempt to show how wrong it is to wear make-up, Ruth tells some history and stories regarding it. (I have not looked into their veracity.) The reader hears how make-up has been used for seducing and even in idol worship. The Puritans were against it and make-up was "prohibited among respectable people" "for the majority of the nineteenth century." (Once again there will be a focus on America.)

She continues to share how make-up was still frowned upon in the early 1900s, with women being sent home from work or fired for wearing it. It is pointed out that men in particular held these negative views of make-up, I assume in an effort to push the claim about seduction. After WWI, things started changing more and "with the inception of mass marketing, an advertising frenzy ensued as women were slowly being conditioned to believe that painting was permissible."

I will agree with Ruth about how advertisement campaigns can have a negative influence on people. They have been and will continue to be used as avenues to sell whatever companies feel may make them money. They can help to change the perception of people, for good or bad. Just think of all the young girls and other women who felt the need to have a perfect skinny body, who harmed their bodies and became anorexic or bulimic because they weren't living up to what they saw pictured in all the magazines and advertisements.

However, none of this nor delving into Egyptian or American history, has any bearing on whether God says it is wrong for believers to wear make-up. It has nothing to do with what the Bible teaches. While it may make for interesting reading, these things do nothing to answer the question of whether these practices are right or wrong for a Christian.

Ruth claims that "makeup was originally used to advertise harlotry." She asks if makeup is really innocent. "Should the children of God who are called to reflect his glory engage in such practices?" Of course her conclusion is that we should not. Then after taking eight pages to share about history, she now turns to the Bible but yet she doesn't, not really.

She takes a couple pages to remind us what was previously shared about Lucifer. We then are asked why we would want to alter God's image (meaning believers). Still no Bible quotations are given that show make-up is wrong, but she proclaims that "throughout Scripture, makeup has always been synonymous with idolatry and harlotry."

Of course this takes her to Jezebel from the Old Testament. She was wicked and used make-up. Israel & Judah followed pagan ways and God sent them into captivity. Still no Bible quotes are given that state make-up is wrong, just distortions of a couple passages.

We then hear how our face is a mirror that reflects God's glory. Our liberty from darkness "shines forth in the unveiled faces of the saints of God." The face of Moses shining after his encounter with God is mentioned. And again not one Bible passage is quoted that says a believer is not to wear make-up.

She ends by saying in part, "The glory of God can only reflect in a face free of deception. We do not need any cosmetics to enhance our appearance. The only beautifying agent that a saint of God needs is the Holy Ghost...."

These outward standard teachings attempt to control people. They do not allow for each person to discern for themselves and to allow God's Spirit to individually lead them. The teachings show a distrust in believers being able to hear from God for themselves. Instead, everyone is expected to fully comply with standards that change from church to church and yet are all proclaimed as from God and the Bible. These are part of the problems we deal with where spiritual abuse is concerned.

I will say again that it doesn't matter how make-up may have been used by some in the past. It doesn't matter what American history shows. If one is to teach that it is spoken against in the Bible, then they should be able to produce Scripture that clearly proclaims it to be wrong, without reading into it things that are not stated. Ruth Rieder Harvey failed in this.

Chapter Five: Jewelry Use Reveals Your Allegiance and Influence In Your Life...It's The Devil!

"I noticed a woman who appeared to be a sister in the Lord. Preparing to greet her, I stopped short upon catching sight of earrings dangling from her ears. Pierced ears identified her allegiance and revealed the influence that held sway in her life."

Jewelry. Some unhealthy churches teach that jewelry is wrong for any Christian to wear. Some teach that its use brings about vanity and pride, calling attention to the wearer. Ruth Harvey gives it a twist.

Ruth claims that "precious stones were initially created for the express purpose of reflecting God's glory. When Lucifer was cast as profane from the mountain of God, jewels ceased to be a medium whereby God reflected His glory. After his expulsion from Heaven, satan used jewelry to effect his influence in the earth." Nothing in the Bible is shared to lend support to these claims.

This chapter is only four pages in length, which is surprising since the author shares how she was fascinated by jewelry and would adorn herself with it in "legal" ways until she felt convicted against it. Only two passages are quoted from the Bible, neither of which speak for or against the wearing of jewelry.

Ruth neglects to share how we see God's people wearing or being given jewelry in the Bible. (This is a good example of why I stress the need to look into what the "whole" or all of the Bible teaches on a matter.) For instance, when Abraham sent his servant to find a wife for Isaac, he gave Rebekah and her family jewelry made of gold and silver (Genesis 24). In the book of Exodus, the Israelites are given all manner of silver and gold jewelry and later at least some gave these as a free offering to God, to be used in the construction of the tabernacle and things related to it. There are other references to jewelry that show it was freely used.

The author shares about seeing a woman who was talking to herself and was dressed in what she considered to be a "bizarre" manner. All her jewelry is mentioned. It is claimed the woman was demon possessed and in sharing such, the impression is given that the jewelry was tied to it. She claimed "her captivity was disclosed in the magnitude of jewelry that she wore." The message is clear. One risks being possessed should they wear jewelry and the more you wear, the more "control of our lives" the devil will have.

What can we conclude? Though Ruth speaks against the use of any jewelry, she was unable to share even one passage that stated that God is against its use and it is wrong to wear. Instead of not greeting a woman who is wearing earrings because you have judged her as being influenced by the devil, how about trying to talk to her and discover who she really is?

And I dare say that if it is wrong to use jewelry because it brings attention to the person, then wouldn't wearing feathers, scarves and bows do the same?

Chapter Six: Our Clothing - A Matter Of Life And Death?

"It could be a matter of spiritual life and death."

"Suddenly liberated from all former political restraints, women began casting their votes. Unfortunately, they cast aside their morals and virtues as well."

Ruth, in chapter six, spends pages talking about some history in (again) America, with most of the comments not being given any outside support other than her book. When she does give a footnote for these historical pieces, they mostly stem from one book on clothing where a woman has shared her personal interpretation of what some clothing has meant through the years.

The story of Adam and Eve arises and how when they fell they became aware of their nakedness. Their fig leaf clothing was insufficient and so God gave them proper clothing. She says that since God gave them robes, that he therefore set a "divine precept of modesty for mankind." It doesn't matter that the Bible does not proclaim this to be the only manner of dress for all cultures in all times. It doesn't even matter that the Bible does not fully describe the clothing God made them. I guess if one were to carry this to a further extreme, all clothing should be made from animals as the first were, if this is our all time standard. And was underwear made by God then or was that a later invention since it is not mentioned?

Though she states that "modesty cannot be defined by the current societal ideals," she also uses past societal ideals to promote the teachings. I will agree with her when she claims that believers "must be governed by the guidelines outlined" in the Bible. However, I cannot agree with all her thoughts on what that entails.

1 Corinthians 6:19-20 is used as part of her effort to teach the importance of how we dress. She attempts to make the passage (our body being the temple of the Spirit) about clothing by sharing how the High Priest had to dress just right and how "this was a matter of life and death," as if the clothing of the High Priest pertains to believers today. Ruth appears to lose sight of how this passage was clearly written in reference to fornication and is not about anything we may or may not wear. Read it in its context and see for yourself.

While the author has valid concerns about the types of dress that may be seen today and how there has been desensitization in our culture, I believe it is important to teach biblical principles as opposed to dictating and mandating spelled out rules of dress. How are Christians supposed to learn to feel out what is wrong or right for them when there are pastors, ministers and authors like Ruth Harvey who claim it must be the way they see it? How are they supposed to learn to recognize when God is speaking to them in this area when they have so many other voices yelling commands their way?

At the end of this chapter it is proclaimed, "We are God's property, and He determines the manner in which we dress." Yes, I do wish that churches would allow this. I wish the author and others would allow God to speak to the hearts of every believer without dictating to others what "God" is requiring of them!

Chapter Seven: A Warning Against Spiritual Pride And Not Seeing Her Own

"You can look holy from head to toe and be nothing more than a hypocrite putting on a shallow display of insincere piety."

"Having seen how the glory of God is reflected in the outer man, let us focus on the reflection of God in the inner man."

Would it not have been better to reserve the majority of the book to the inner man instead of setting aside only eight pages to address it? If the inner part of a person is right and trying to follow the guidance of the Holy Spirit, it will be seen on the outside without anyone dictating rules to them. Though the author shares that "one's perspective of holiness can become convoluted and unbalanced," she only gives very limited space to addressing this. By instead placing the main focus on the outward, believers run the risk of becoming like the Pharisees, who made sure they looked holy on the outside, but Jesus said their inner man was dead. This is a problem when we demand compliance to "holiness standard" rules, instead of speaking about principles and allowing God's Spirit to individually transform us on the inside.

In chapter seven of the book, Ruth warns against spiritual pride and shares a story about her (then) husband.

Michael Rieder was into the disco scene in the 70s, as well as the clothing, when he started attending a UPC church. Soon after, he attended a camp meeting and brought his favorite disco outfit as he didn't have other dressy clothing.

After one of the services, two older women, dressed according to the standards, stopped and critically looked Michael over and let it be known they disapproved of his attire. He was shattered and perplexed. According to him, these women, knowing nothing about him, could have destroyed his new found faith.

This story is quite interesting when one compares it to what Ruth herself shared in chapter five about a woman she saw and neglected to greet. She shunned and judged her because she saw her wearing earrings. It appears that the author was oblivious to how these same prideful and judging attitudes were also in herself at the time and when she wrote the book, even though she includes both stories in her writings.

"I noticed a woman who appeared to be a sister in the Lord. Preparing to greet her, I stopped short upon catching sight of earrings dangling from her ears. Pierced ears identified her allegiance and revealed the influence that held sway in her life." How is this any different from the two women who judged Michael by his disco clothing?

She spends some time speaking about the Pharisees and once again about Lucifer. She also shares that the nature of God is holiness.

She concludes this chapter by stating, "Holiness standards are a medium whereby we separate ourselves from the world and all its influences of evil." Once again, there is no scripture that teaches such. It may be a medium by which some religious organizations and people within them separate themselves from others, but it is certainly not the manner in which God calls us to be separate.

This chapter of the book is where I find the most agreement with the author as it isn't focusing on all the rules that she teaches. However, despite seeing the need for taking care of the inward person, she still has far too much focus on the outer. Her book could have been so much different had she emphasized some things in this chapter as compared to all the outward rules concerning dress and hair.

Chapter Eight: Dire Warnings - Fear Rears Its Ugly Head Again

"Are you chosen to be special? The choice is up to you!!"

"Our choices will determine our destiny!"

"Special care must be taken to insure the pristine condition of the wedding garment."

"Bound hand and foot, they will be cast into outer darkness."

In the final chapter of the book, the author sums up her findings by emphasizing believers are chosen to be special. The fear factor is once again heavily present. Though some will say that these outward standards are not taught as matters of salvation (and indeed some do not teach this), when one gives dire warnings that they may be cast into outer darkness and that their "choices will determine our destiny," then one can only see the teachings as matters that may make or break the salvation of a person.

Ruth shares how Israel backslid and followed after other gods, so God turned to the Gentiles. She speaks of being the Bride of Christ and how exciting it is for a woman to be a bride. The bride must plan the event, shop for a gown, and then anxiously await the wedding while ensuring that nothing happens to the gown. This is compared to believers being the Bride of Christ.

In this comparison, it is taught that we should be overjoyed in "being set apart from the world," and that "special care must be taken to insure the pristine condition of the wedding garment." It appears that she gets this thought from the parable in Matthew 22, where people are invited to a wedding by a king and one man arrives without a wedding garment. This man is cast out of the wedding.

The parable is a far cry from certain people and churches insisting upon their rules on "holiness standards." It isn't about diligently working on the gown of the bride. In fact, it isn't a woman who is found without a wedding garment, but a man and one man at that. Yet this is used to convey the thought that if one doesn't follow these standards, they will be "bound hand and foot" and "cast into outer darkness."

If one is going to teach these types of rules, they should be able to do so without tossing in the fear factor. Why does the salvation of people have to be threatened? Why must they be compared to prostitutes and more? Fear is behind all of these teachings espoused by Ruth Rieder. Fear is a major factor in spiritual abuse.

So, you don't think she associates these things with your salvation? Perhaps I and others are reading things into her writings, you might wonder? She herself states on page 100: "The world loudly claims that separation and holy living are no longer an essential part of salvation. Deceived, they will seek to gain entrance to the marriage without proper attire. ....Bound hand and foot, they will be cast into outer darkness." Yes, the author indeed teaches these things as absolutely essential if you are to be saved.

I am going to close with this thought. In this chapter it is emphasized that we are to be the Bride of Christ. Let us take a few moments to turn to the Bible and see just what is shared about brides in Isaiah and Revelation. You will find a different story painted than the one told by the author.

Isaiah 61:10 "I will greatly rejoice in the Lord, my soul shall be joyful in my God; for he hath clothed me with the garments of salvation, he hath covered me with the robe of righteousness, as a bridegroom decketh himself with ornaments, and as a bride adorneth herself with her jewels."

Note the very positive mention of ornaments and jewels. Pay special attention to the fact that GOD clothes with garments of salvation and a robe of righteousness. It is nothing WE must work on for fear of being cast out.

Hear also how the new Jerusalem is described in Revelation 21.

"And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. ...her light was like unto a stone most precious, even like a jasper stone, clear as crystal;...And the building of the wall of it was of jasper: and the city was pure gold, like unto clear glass. And the foundations of the wall of the city were garnished with all manner of precious stones. The first foundation was jasper; the second, sapphire; the third, a chalcedony; the fourth, an emerald; The fifth, sardonyx; the sixth, sardius; the seventh, chrysolyte; the eighth, beryl; the ninth, a topaz; the tenth, a chrysoprasus; the eleventh, a jacinth; the twelfth, an amethyst. And the twelve gates were twelve pearls: every several gate was of one pearl: and the street of the city was pure gold, as it were transparent glass."

"Prepared as a bride adorned for her husband" with all the precious stones that God created.

The teachings of Ruth Rieder Harvey are both erroneous and harmful in how they are taught. Yes, indeed, a person's "perspective of holiness can become convoluted and unbalanced" and this is seen in the teachings found within "Reflecting The Glory." It is my hope that people caught up in these teachings will be able to be set free from the fear and error and learn to listen to the leading of the Spirit for themselves.

For further information and additional reviews of her books, go here.

If you wish to see videos of studies related to this book that are affirming her writings (there are a series of nine by one minister from Lighthouse United Pentecostal Church), you may watch below:

You may write Lois at the email address displayed in the image. No correspondence that seeks to debate will be answered as I have no desire to debate. Understand that due to the volume of mail, not every email may be acknowledged.
Email address

Copyright 2013

Posted November 10, 2013 & Updated May 25, 2014 & Links checked June 25, 2016


August 23, 1997
Copyright © 1997-2014 by Lois E. Gibson
Contents of this web site and all original works are copyright - All rights reserved. The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of the owner.

Shop at our Amazon store! This website is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com.