Facts Found~The Early Church and Standards~

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by Socialite

His premise wasn't shorts and tank tops (though I'm not sure what the problem is). As he articulated already in the post, he is rubbing the false perspectives about "in, not of" that many preach. They were a very integrated group not feeling it was their chief duty to declare war against their culture.

I doubt very sincerely that the early Christians were indistiguishable from the rest of the surrounding masses.

I am not a clothesline believer per se, but I am willing to bet that Christians were not hanging out at the Roman bathhouses. They probably were not taking part in many of the flesh gratifying practices of their culture that would contradict their faith in a Savior whose life's purpose was to DIE.

In leaving those dead works, I imagine they left behind MOST IF NOT EVERYTHING associated with those dead works.



The easiest thing to do would be to live a legalistic life, using a set of rules and tongue talking to take comfort in.

What the early Church had was something far heavier than a list of rules.

I am sure there was a difference in their appearance-- even if it was nothing more than the glow of the Lord.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by houston

I think people more than 20 lbs overweight per the bmi should be fined for wearing a tank top in public.

They can't wash their cars, while enjoyinig the rays of the sun warming their wings and rolls?

[houston]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

They can't wash their cars, while enjoyinig the rays of the sun warming their wings and rolls?

the only warm rolls that I want to see are covered with icing and pecans at Cinnabon

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

I doubt very sincerely that the early Christians were indistiguishable from the rest of the surrounding masses.

I am not a clothesline believer per se, but I am willing to bet that Christians were not hanging out at the Roman bathhouses. They probably were not taking part in many of the flesh gratifying practices of their culture that would contradict their faith in a Savior whose life's purpose was to DIE.

In leaving those dead works, I imagine they left behind MOST IF NOT EVERYTHING associated with those dead works.



The easiest thing to do would be to live a legalistic life, using a set of rules and tongue talking to take comfort in.

What the early Church had was something far heavier than a list of rules.

I am sure there was a difference in their appearance-- even if it was nothing more than the glow of the Lord.

You can think whatever you'd like -- and I'm not disagreeing if their countenance didn't look different.

Not sure why you included Roman bath houses. Many of those Roman bath houses were for the upper class and I'm not sure why you include them as something immoral? Did you know most bath houses were exclusively for men, women getting hours not preferred. Mixed bathing wasn't even popular (and when I say "bathing" I mean bathing, not swimming).

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

Nothing in and by itself.

What's wrong with the intent of the person wearing that tank top?

God is the only Judge whose judgments have eternal consequences, but we can usually judge our brother's and sister's intent when wearing their tank tops by their behavior.

Intent??

The only people with poor intent when sporting a tank top are believers who grew up, or are growing up, in legalistic homes where tanks tops are taboo. Everywhere else, tank tops are hardly thought about. Just like another wardrobe piece -- particularly useful for sports and exercise.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by Socialite

You can think whatever you'd like -- and I'm not disagreeing if their countenance didn't look different.

Not sure why you included Roman bath houses. Many of those Roman bath houses were for the upper class and I'm not sure why you include them as something immoral? Did you know most bath houses were exclusively for men, women getting hours not preferred. Mixed bathing wasn't even popular (and when I say "bathing" I mean bathing, not swimming).

My idea of the Roman bath houses from history is that they were a place of public lewdness and all sorts of immorality.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by Socialite

Intent??

The only people with poor intent when sporting a tank top are believers who grew up, or are growing up, in legalistic homes where tanks tops are taboo. Everywhere else, tank tops are hardly thought about. Just like another wardrobe piece -- particularly useful for sports and exercise.

You are probably right.

However, didn't Paul talk about this-- something to the affect that when he was ignorant, he walked in ignorance, so he was blind to the negative aspects of his life until he was born again?

[Jermyn Davidson]

In a culture where everyone is naked, are they not still immodest?

[Withdrawn]

Originally Posted by Sister Alvear

I know my opinion is so different...than most people's opinion....however holiness is a way of life not a manner of dress. Now by saying that it does not mean I run around half dressed....those that know me know I am an old missionary and try to dress in a way that attention is not drawn to me but to my lovely Lord...However all the layers of clothes I could put on would never make me holy enough to crawl into His presence...

I have found out over the years you can dress up a devil....however if you can really get people converted ther desires and affections are on things above. A true christian is not out trying to have some lust party...

Origen once said: “Eventually, every form of worship will be destroyed except the religion of Christ, which alone will stand. In fact, it will one day triumph, for its teachings take hold of men's minds more and more each day.”

Holiness if that is the term we want to use is a 24/7 way of life...not a Sunday and Wednesday social gathering to show off our new clothes....


I think I willl run to the jungle....

This is the single greatest post I've seen on AFF in months. I've found very few discussions really worth commenting on (I've been lurking), but have to give kudos to Sis. Alvear for once again steering us back to the truth and giving us a dose of what it really means to live a godly life! God bless you, Sis. Alvear! You and your family are continually in my prayers.

[BrotherEastman]

Originally Posted by Pastor Keith

Have you ever been curious how the First Church regarded standards, holiness and living in a pagan culture?

Well this is a testimony by a Disciple of Polycarp named Mathetes, who most likely wrote this between 100-140AD.

I think to be an eye opener and will likely change your perspective on how the early church related to and lived in a pagan world. I highlighted some parts that I thought would be of interest to our diverse forum.

It was titled "The Manner of Christians"

For the Christians are distinguished from other men neither by country, nor language, nor the customs which they observe. For they neither inhabit cities of their own, nor employ a peculiar form of speech, nor lead a life which is marked out by any singularity. The course of conduct which they follow has not been devised by any speculation or deliberation of inquisitive men; nor do they, like some, proclaim themselves the advocates of any merely human doctrines. But, inhabiting Greek as well as barbarian cities, according as the lot of each of them has determined, and following the customs of the natives in respect to clothing, food, and the rest of their ordinary conduct, they display to us their wonderful and confessedly striking [281] method of life. They dwell in their own countries, but simply as sojourners. As citizens, they share in all things with others, and yet endure all things as if foreigners. Every foreign land is to them as their native country, and every land of their birth as a land of strangers. They marry, as do all [others]; they beget children; but they do not destroy their offspring. [282] They have a common table, but not a common bed. [283] They are in the flesh, but they do not live after the flesh. [284] They pass their days on earth, but they are citizens of heaven. [285] They obey the prescribed laws, and at the same time surpass the laws by their lives. They love all men, and are persecuted by all. They are unknown and condemned; they are put to death, and restored to life. [286] They are poor, yet make many rich; [287] they are in lack of all things, and yet abound in all; they are dishonoured, and yet in their very dishonour are glorified. They are evil spoken of, and yet are justified; they are reviled, and bless; [288] they are insulted, and repay the insult with honour; they do good, yet are punished as evil-doers. When punished, they rejoice as if quickened into life; they are assailed by the Jews as foreigners, and are persecuted by the Greeks; yet those who hate them are unable to assign any reason for their hatred.

I have found that the crowd isn't always right in what they do.....as a matter of fact they are usually wrong. remember, the crowd chose Barabbas.