Apostolic Friends Forum
Tab Menu 1
Go Back   Apostolic Friends Forum > The Fellowship Hall > Fellowship Hall
Facebook

Notices

Fellowship Hall The place to go for Fellowship & Fun!


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 07-15-2008, 12:03 PM
Scott Hutchinson's Avatar
Scott Hutchinson Scott Hutchinson is offline
Resident PeaceMaker


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Jackson,AL.
Posts: 16,548
Re: Narrow is taking Questions.

Would you consider watching videos from you-tube or God-tube the same as watching television ? Would churches having a webcast be the same as advertising on TV ?
__________________
People who are always looking for fault,can find it easily all they have to do,is look into their mirror.
There they can find plenty of fault.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 07-15-2008, 12:38 PM
Narrow Is The Way Narrow Is The Way is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 356
Re: Narrow is taking Questions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Weary Pilgrim View Post
Okay,I'll take you up on your offer. Let me first preface by saying I'm not too fond of jewelry personally,but how do you come to the conclusion that all jewelry is forbidden in scripture and furthermore that it will send a person to hell even a wedding band? In the N. there are scriptures that teach moderation but there are no scriptures that declare it as a sin. In fact, there are scriptures in the O.T that speak very favorably of jewelry. How then can it all be evil?
First of all, thank you for your question. Unlike some of the questions (not all) that have followed yours of people already trying to make this a gotcha thread, this is a very good question that I believe that you are sincere about. I will say that I am glad that jewelry bothers you to some degree. I do not like the spirit that is behind any type of jewelry.

In reference to the wedding ring. The origination of the wedding band comes from ancient Egypt. I believe that when we come to Christ we are to put away Egypt, because God has a promise land awaiting us. The concept of the wedding band has now been promoted in this modern day by the Catholic church. I heard a testimony of a former altar boy in the Catholic church who said that he was taught that a wedding band was a sign of unity between a man and a woman and you both were in agreement with the teachings of the holy trinity. Apostolics, take a stand against the teachings of a triune God. The ring finger is chosen because of a particular vein that runs from the finger to the heart. This is absolute promotion of the power of the flesh. The Bible says that no flesh should glory in his presence 1 Cor. 1:29. I think we would all agree that a ring is not stopping marriages from being shattered by immorality.

Anybody who takes time out to read their Bible will quickly discover that God is interested in his people being holy, both within and on the outside.

Our eyes should be Holy (Job 31:1)
Our hair should be Holy (1 Corinthians 11:7)
Our mouth should be Holy (Matthew 12:37)
Our bodies should be Holy (Romans 12:1)
Our lips should be Holy (Hosea 14:2)
Our tongues should be Holy (Acts 2:11)
Our speech should be Holy (Colossians 4:6)
Our hands should be Holy (1 Timothy 2:8)
Our minds should be Holy (Hebrews 10:16)
Our thoughts should be Holy (Psalm 139: 23-24)
Our feet should be Holy (Hebrews 12:13)
Our dress should be Holy (1 Timothy 2:9)
Our deeds should be Holy (Romans 2:6)
Our spirit should be Holy (1 Corinthians 6:20)
Our worship should be Holy (1 Chronicles 16:29)
Our Faith should be most Holy (Jude 20)
Every facet of life is covered in the word of God and the need for it to be holy.


You mentioned the Old Testament so let us start there. I am fully aware that there were many things once allowed in the Old Testament. Many things that we would all agree are wrong today. Things such as Divorce for any cause, Polygamy (having more than 1 wife), and the taking of human life in personal vengeance or battle, and last but not least, the wearing of jewelry.

Under the mosaic law, if a man wished to divorce his wife he just simply wrote out the words and handed over the “bill of divorcement” They were now free to marry someone else. But now the Lord has commanded that divorce and remarriage is allowed only in the cases where one of the parties has engaged in illicit sex. (Matthew 19:9)

In the Old testament men were allowed to have more than one wife. Even allowed, it always caused problems within the family. There was no restriction on the number of wives a man might have except for the King of Israel (Deut. 17:17), whose lifestyle and leadership set the tone for the entire nation. However the new testament now declares for a husband to have 1 wife (1 Timothy 3:2)

In the Old testament, the taking of human life in time of war, or as a family vengeance for a kinsman’s life taken by another was permissible (Deut 19:4-13, Joshua 20:1-6) King David engaged in warfare, yet was called a man after God’s own heart. Jesus on the other hand, taught and lived a life of pacification. Isaiah 53:7 said that “He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before here shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth. He also said “Ye have heard that it hath been said, an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, That ye resist not Evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. It had been said Love thy neighbor and hate thine enemy, but Jesus said, “Love your enemies……” There was so much more that Jesus taught that it was better to do.

So it is very clear that lifestyles that were permitted in the Old Testament were put away and abolished in the New Testament and were now declared as sin.

Moses allowed causeless divorce among the children of Israel because of the hardness of their hart. But now hardness of heart is no longer excusable (Mark 10:4-6) In fact because of the gift of the Holy Ghost and the availability of his Grace, there is much more expected of God’s people now than in previous dispensations. (Luke 12:48)

Even though God allowed things to go on in the Old Testament, he would on occasion give his true feelings in a matter. His feelings on Divorce were expressed in Malachi
2: 14-16

Likewise, God allowed jewelry in the Old Testament, but on several occasions showed that he WAS NOT for his people wearing it. His feelings are seen in Jacob’s actions upon his return to the altar at Bethel. Jacob who had been with his uncle Laban for approx. 20 years took wives and had many sons and daughters, but upon his return to the land of Canaan he came back to Bethel and began to get serious with God. He knew that his brother Esau was coming to meet him with four hundred armed horsemen. Jacob knew that it was time to get down to business with God. So Jacob began an earnest prayer meeting. The bible said “And let us arise and go to bethel: and I will make here and altar unto God, who answered me in the day of distress, and was with me in the way which I went“. (Pay close attention to what happened next) “And they gave unto Jacob all the strange Gods which were in their hand, and all their earrings which were in their ears and Jacob hid them under the oak which was by Schechem (Genesis 35:3,4) It was just a given that Jacob would but away all the “strange Gods” in preparing his house to meet the one true God, but he also understood that the jewelry had to go also.

If you will read further you will find that following this act of consecration Jacob the supplanter was now know as Isreal “The prince of God”

The Old Testament associated jewelry with pride. In Isaiah 3: 16-21 both the pride and the attire of the daughters of Zion were on display, and God declared that he was going to take them away, both the pride and the jewelry. It is interesting to note that God equated their prideful spirit and their jewelry in the same breath. No doubt because their pride was manifested in their ornaments, as well in how they carried themselves. Pride loves to manifest itself through Jewelry. The ultimate prideful spirit was found in the devil who was literally covered in precious stones and jewels.

You might be wondering about the New Testament because we consider ourselves to be New Testament Christians. The New Testament is where God allowed his true feelings to be displayed. He used 2 men. Peter and Paul to express is true feelings on jewelry. Let me remind you that Peter was trusted to deliver this most sacred Acts 2:38 message so I will not shut off the words of Peter by no means. We can see that these 2 men carried a great responsibility. Peter’s responsibility was to the Jews and Pauls responsibility to the Gentiles. We find that both of these men were definitely against the wearing of jewelry. Peter said, let it not be the wearing of gold. The word gold in this text means all manner of ornaments. Jewelry should not be in the Apostolic church. LET IT NOT BE. Remember this is the same Peter whose words we obeyed when we received the Holy Ghost. Paul was also against the wearing of Gold (ornaments) (1 Timothy 2:8) These 2 men both had the same message against jewelry. Surely we can trust these 2 men.

Even thought God did express his feelings about Jewelry, you are correct when you say that he never did clearly draw a line against it in the Old Testament. BUT NOW THROUGH BOTH PETER AND PAUL….HE HAS.

I will leave you with this:

The Bible drew a comparison between 2 women. First there was the adorning of the Harlot in the 17 chapter of Revelations. We already know her doctrine, righteousness, sanctity, and her spirit is wrong so look at how she is clothed. “And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet color, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication.”

Let’s compare the adorning of the harlot with the adorning of the true bride.

(Revelation 19:7-8) Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honor to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready. And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.

Compare these two. They differ in doctrine, righteousness, sanctity, spirit, demeanor, AND IN ORNAMENT.

I want to be more like the bride of Christ.




Ok. Now you know why I am not going to answer 100 questions a day. If your question is really good and the spirit behind your question is sincere, I am willing to take a couple of hours out of my day, (as I have done here) to explain where I stand on a particular issue. I hope the use of scripture is helpful also.



Might not get to any more today. Gotta put food on the table. LOL
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 07-15-2008, 12:40 PM
Rico Rico is offline
Shaking the dust off my shoes.


 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Nunya bidness
Posts: 9,004
Re: Narrow is taking Questions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1Corinth2v4 View Post
Hello........Hi Doctor....



Thanks for having me.......I have quiet a dilemma...


I have a patient that's exhibiting delusional symptoms which slightly improved during the course of BLT, the patient never showed delusions before or during BLT, and showed an increase in agitation and developed delusional symptoms. After eight days of treatment, the patient developed conjunctival irritation with marked red eyes and complained about blurred vision. After 12 days of treatment, the patient was disorientated in time and place and after 14 days the patient started to hallucinate and BLT had to be discontinued. The paranoid delusions and hallucinations stopped one day after treatment discontinuation.


May I have your opinion and course of treatment on the matter?
What does eating a bacon, lettuce, and tomato sandwich have to do with being delusional? Did he think it was a pastrami on rye?
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 07-15-2008, 01:54 PM
U376977 U376977 is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 897
Re: Narrow is taking Questions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1399 View Post
Do you consider Christians who are ref'd to on here as "One-Steppers" to be saved brothers in the Lord?

Would you let an ex-gay man who has been completely delivered from gayness marry a lady in your church?
Further......question.


1. Can the one-steppers baptize?
2. Can the ex-gay preach in your church?
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 07-15-2008, 02:39 PM
Praxeas's Avatar
Praxeas Praxeas is offline
Go Dodgers!


 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 45,789
Re: Narrow is taking Questions.

Before I can ask any questions I need to know:

Does Narrow Is the Way speaking for ALL Conservatives? Thus if NITW says it is true anyone that does not agree is not Conservative?
__________________
Let it be understood that Apostolic Friends Forum is an Apostolic Forum.
Apostolic is defined on AFF as:


  1. There is One God. This one God reveals Himself distinctly as Father, Son and Holy Ghost.
  2. The Son is God himself in a human form or "God manifested in the flesh" (1Tim 3:16)
  3. Every sinner must repent of their sins.
  4. That Jesus name baptism is the only biblical mode of water baptism.
  5. That the Holy Ghost is for today and is received by faith with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues.
  6. The saint will go on to strive to live a holy life, pleasing to God.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 07-15-2008, 02:41 PM
OnTheFritz's Avatar
OnTheFritz OnTheFritz is offline
Tired of it.


 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,645
Re: Narrow is taking Questions.

Quote:
So let us draw a comparison. If you libs. are right (and your not), and television is ok, Christian rock is ok, Jewelry is ok, Video is Ok, ladies cutting your hair is ok, etc. Guess what? It won't affect my salvation because I avoided those things. But what if you are wrong and it is not OK? Guess what? We get the same judge in the end. He won't give you a pass for being wrong about television just like he won't give me a pass if I have a bad spirit.
Your quote above is from a discussion on the Enough! thread. What I want to know is whether this post is exaggeratory in any way, or if you truly believe that these are salvific issues. And are you absolutely certain that you are correct (as the bold area implies), and if so, how? My assumption with many ultracons is that they set guidelines to keep themselves well within the safe zone, if you will. I completely understand and respect that. But, your comments don't make such an implication. Do you really believe that people that watch video (content being irrelevant) are in danger of going to hell for that reason, or is it more of a slippery slope argument (e.g. If I watch some TV, I will likely eventually come across something I shouldn't)?

I have no desire to tear down someone's personal areas of conviction or ridicule them for the decisions they make. I have a problem when these guidelines get confused with doctrinal issues, and then portrayed as absolute heaven and hell issues.
__________________
Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who find it. — André Gide

A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds... - Ralph Waldo Emerson
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 07-15-2008, 11:53 PM
Narrow Is The Way Narrow Is The Way is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 356
Re: Narrow is taking Questions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1399 View Post
Do you consider Christians who are ref'd to on here as "One-Steppers" to be saved brothers in the Lord?

Would you let an ex-gay man who has been completely delivered from gayness marry a lady in your church?
Answer to question 1:
No, I do not consider One steppers to be saved. I believe that if they do not change their doctrine they will go to Hell.

Answer to question 2:
It would all depend on how much tithes he pays, LOL (just kidding people)

First of all I cannot answer this question as a matter of fact because I am not a pastor. I also cannot answer this question directly because each situation is different (I think we would all agree with that) I do believe that judgment begins at the house of God. A pastor would have to be very careful in dealing with this type of situation. There would have to be absolutely no lingering affects and tendencies. The Bible is against effeminate men, (1 Corinthians 6: 9-10) they may not be homosexuals but being effeminate is just as wrong according to scripture. If I was a pastor I would not want to make this type of decision without prayerful consideration and much fasting.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 07-16-2008, 12:15 AM
Narrow Is The Way Narrow Is The Way is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 356
Re: Narrow is taking Questions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhoni View Post
Number 1: If you don't care to identify yourself what makes you so sure any of us would value your opinion over any other?

Number 2: Do you feel it is your duty/responsibility to use this forum as a means to convert those who are not conservative to your way of thinking/save us?

Blessings, Rhoni
Answer to question 1

I don’t think anybody values my opinion over the other.

Answer to question 2

Not really. To be honest with you there isn’t much hope here on the forum, but if there is someone that is just a visitor to AFF or this thread and they are truly hungry for God, I might can help them. Sometimes I think that I am wasting my time here. The prevailing rule it seems, on this forum, is that Conservatives have to always prove why we are right, but the liberals never have to prove the contrary. For instance I have to constantly prove why we are not to have television, but the liberals on this forum never ever have to prove why they can have a television according to scripture. It’s a double standard, but I am trying to weave through this mess. Probably won’t do it for long. My gut tells me it is a waste of time. There are always what if’s. It just bothers people when you really take a stand and are not afraid to tell what you believe.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 07-16-2008, 12:28 AM
Rico Rico is offline
Shaking the dust off my shoes.


 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Nunya bidness
Posts: 9,004
Re: Narrow is taking Questions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Narrow Is The Way View Post
Answer to question 1

I don’t think anybody values my opinion over the other.

Answer to question 2

Not really. To be honest with you there isn’t much hope here on the forum, but if there is someone that is just a visitor to AFF or this thread and they are truly hungry for God, I might can help them. Sometimes I think that I am wasting my time here. The prevailing rule it seems, on this forum, is that Conservatives have to always prove why we are right, but the liberals never have to prove the contrary. For instance I have to constantly prove why we are not to have television, but the liberals on this forum never ever have to prove why they can have a television according to scripture. It’s a double standard, but I am trying to weave through this mess. Probably won’t do it for long. My gut tells me it is a waste of time. There are always what if’s. It just bothers people when you really take a stand and are not afraid to tell what you believe.
Hmmmmm. Maybe it's because they don't come here and tell people who don't have a tv that they're going to hell for not having one. I just wonder if maybe that could be the reason.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 07-16-2008, 09:49 AM
OnTheFritz's Avatar
OnTheFritz OnTheFritz is offline
Tired of it.


 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,645
Re: Narrow is taking Questions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Narrow Is The Way View Post
Answer to question 1

I don’t think anybody values my opinion over the other.

Answer to question 2

Not really. To be honest with you there isn’t much hope here on the forum, but if there is someone that is just a visitor to AFF or this thread and they are truly hungry for God, I might can help them. Sometimes I think that I am wasting my time here. The prevailing rule it seems, on this forum, is that Conservatives have to always prove why we are right, but the liberals never have to prove the contrary. For instance I have to constantly prove why we are not to have television, but the liberals on this forum never ever have to prove why they can have a television according to scripture. It’s a double standard, but I am trying to weave through this mess. Probably won’t do it for long. My gut tells me it is a waste of time. There are always what if’s. It just bothers people when you really take a stand and are not afraid to tell what you believe.
We also don't have to prove that we are allowed to wear blue pants or that we are allowed to sing on Wednesdays. What's to prove? It ain't in there. Since you are the one adding things that aren't in there, it seems the onus should be on you to justify it .
__________________
Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who find it. — André Gide

A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds... - Ralph Waldo Emerson
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Taking Amanda in for surgery now. jediwill83 Prayer Closet 6 07-10-2008 11:07 AM
Taking responsibility for our own actions. Mrs. LPW Fellowship Hall 16 06-11-2008 03:33 PM
Taking daughter to the ER now... Please pray AmazingGrace Fellowship Hall 82 05-09-2008 07:35 PM
Taking a break meBNme Fellowship Hall 47 12-12-2007 05:22 PM
The cost of taking the gospel Sister Alvear Fellowship Hall 1 06-05-2007 10:26 PM

 
User Infomation
Your Avatar

Latest Threads
- by Praxeas
- by Amanah

Help Support AFF!

Advertisement




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.