Wedding Rings

[Scott Hutchinson]

If a wrist watch even has a leather band but because it has metal parts is it considered jewelery ?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Scott Hutchinson

If a wrist watch even has a leather band but because it has metal parts is it considered jewelery ?

why not...plastic ear rings are being called jewelry

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

There nothing in the parable of the prodigal son that indicates the ring was jewelry as such but probably a signet ring which was used as a seal of authority that sometimes was on a leather strap placed on the HAND not finger. If this was for ornamentation where is the evidence the robe and shoes were not ornamental but showing his acceptance back into the family and with the ring it proves he was given full acceptance.

First of all the greek word here is for a finger ring according to strongs
dak-too'-lee-os
From G1147; a finger ring: - ring.

Second signet ring or not, it was a ring.

Third when they were tied to cord they were worn around the neck...like jewelry, but since in this case it was put on his hand (last I checked the finger is part of the hand) and not hung around his neck, then it was....a finger ring

ISBE
Ring
Its other use was perhaps the original, to describe the article of personal adornment worn on the finger, apparently in the Old Testament always a signet-ring, and as such an indispensable article of masculine attire. Such a ring Pharaoh gave Joseph as a symbol of authority (Gen_41:42); and Ahasuerus gave Haman (Est_3:10); with it the royal missive was sealed (Est_3:12; Est_8:8 twice, 10). It was also a feminine ornament in Isaiah's list of the fashionable feminine paraphernalia, "the rings and the nose-jewels" (quite likely rings also) (Isa_3:21). Either as ornaments or for their intrinsic value, or both, rings were used as gifts for sacred purposes from both men and women: "brooches, and ear-rings, and signet-rings" (margin "nose-rings") (Exo_35:22); "bracelets, rings (the American Standard Revised Version "signet-rings"), ear-rings" (Num_31:50 the King James Version). חותם, ḥōthām, "signet," mentioned in Gen_38:18, Gen_38:25; Exo_28:11, Exo_28:21, Exo_28:36; Exo_39:6, Exo_39:14, Exo_39:30; Jer_22:24; Hag_2:23, etc., was probably usually a seal ring, but in Gen 38 and elsewhere the seal may have been swung on wire, and suspended by a cord from the neck.

So then this shows what? That there were certain ornaments they wore that also had practical uses. Either way it was an ornament, worn on the finger or around the neck.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

First of all the greek word here is for a finger ring according to strongs
dak-too'-lee-os
From G1147; a finger ring: - ring.

Second signet ring or not, it was a ring.

Third when they were tied to cord they were worn around the neck...like jewelry, but since in this case it was put on his hand (last I checked the finger is part of the hand) and not hung around his neck, then it was....a finger ring

ISBE
Ring
Its other use was perhaps the original, to describe the article of personal adornment worn on the finger, apparently in the Old Testament always a signet-ring, and as such an indispensable article of masculine attire. Such a ring Pharaoh gave Joseph as a symbol of authority (Gen_41:42); and Ahasuerus gave Haman (Est_3:10); with it the royal missive was sealed (Est_3:12; Est_8:8 twice, 10). It was also a feminine ornament in Isaiah's list of the fashionable feminine paraphernalia, "the rings and the nose-jewels" (quite likely rings also) (Isa_3:21). Either as ornaments or for their intrinsic value, or both, rings were used as gifts for sacred purposes from both men and women: "brooches, and ear-rings, and signet-rings" (margin "nose-rings") (Exo_35:22); "bracelets, rings (the American Standard Revised Version "signet-rings"), ear-rings" (Num_31:50 the King James Version). חותם, ḥōthām, "signet," mentioned in Gen_38:18, Gen_38:25; Exo_28:11, Exo_28:21, Exo_28:36; Exo_39:6, Exo_39:14, Exo_39:30; Jer_22:24; Hag_2:23, etc., was probably usually a seal ring, but in Gen 38 and elsewhere the seal may have been swung on wire, and suspended by a cord from the neck.

So then this shows what? That there were certain ornaments they wore that also had practical uses. Either way it was an ornament, worn on the finger or around the neck.

Again by your own definition it could have very well be a ring on a strap and NOT a finger ring at all. So your own defined word knocks your argument down. But in the parable do you think the ring is for ornamenation or acceptance????

[Thad]

Originally Posted by Truly Blessed

I think its "hearsay" and should be filed away as such. It certainly has no biblical basis.

It is NOT hearsay! it was an actual teaching that was taught at some point by preachers back some years ago. i remember preachers discussing it

[HeavenlyOne]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Rev 21:2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

Brother...that clearly shows the the Bride is the city and that the city is the bride. What more proof do you need?

Whether or not the city is the church? Does it say it is? And if it is....the how do you escape the fact that the church is adorned with ungodly, evil jewelry?

Pardon my butting in here, but that passage DOES NOT say that the city is the bride. It DOES say that the city is adorned like a bride, NOT the city IS the bride.

Just like the verse that says the Holy Ghost descended on Jesus LIKE a dove doesn't mean a dove came down, neither does that verse say the city IS the bride, only that it's adorned LIKE a bride.

There is a comparison being made...a simile.

[HeavenlyOne]

Originally Posted by NobodyImportant

That does not say the city "IS" the bride, but comes down "AS" a bride. It doesn't even say "THE" bride but "A" bride.
I must agree with Bro Epley here, this verse is clear as to what it refers to. A further study will show the people going into and out of it as well, unless I am reading it wrong.
Just my thoughts...
NI

Someone beat me to it....LOL!

[HeavenlyOne]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

I thought that was Epleys verse...He pointed me to Rev 21 and never gave a specific verse...I have yet to see his where he claims the bride is IN the city...you got that one?

So people go in and out of the city...what does that prove? The bible very clearly calls THE Bride that City

Rev 21:9 And there came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with me, saying, Come hither, I will show thee the bride, the Lamb's wife.
Rev 21:10 And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and showed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,

I asked and asked and asked for him to show grammatically how this is NOT saying the bride is that city...he did not take me up on that offer.

I asked too for him to show me where it says the bride is IN the city...still no reply

I do, however, agree with this passage, in that the city is mentioned as being the bride. I read chapters 21 and 22 and no physical bride is mentioned....it only describes the city.

[HeavenlyOne]

Originally Posted by Scott Hutchinson

Here's a question how much do preachers spend on a new suit for a conference ? How many are wearing costly array?

I personally believe that 'costly' is subjective.

To some, 'costly' is spending $20 on a dress.

To others, 'costly' is spending $200 on a dress.

To some others, 'costly' is spending $2000 on a dress.

What is costly for me might not be costly for you. I think 'costly' is defined as something that one can't easily afford, whether is a $20, $200, or $2000 item.

[Thad]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

why not...plastic ear rings are being called jewelry

that's something I had not considered. I am thinking that it would still be thought of as Ornaments whereas a watch serves as a function ?