I wish someone versed in Brother Treece's teaching on the subject could elaborate.
he is quite conservitive on most matters and is often quoted on the subject of uncut hair. However, he teaches that one SHOULD wear a wedding ring.
ahem....I disagree.We have been to the Treeces church and I did not
notice that they were ultra cons.He's pre trib anyway and most ultracons
are post.He did have a great doctrine on UFO's my last prophecy conference trip there though.:sshhh
My mother was convicted of her wedding ring in the late 60's shortly after she came into the truth. No one preached against it or even spoke to her about it, God dealt with her about it. She has never wore one since. My father didn't like it but never made a big issue of it and he is still not in church today.
I grew up under the teaching of no rings and the church I attend believes it this way.
When I was married over 20 years ago we did not have wedding rings nor did we have token bibles, etc.
I do not need a ring to know I am married nor does my wife want one. We act married when we are at work or else where. There have been very few times we have had to tell anyone the "I am married" line because of not wearing a ring.
One thing leads to another, whether it is on the spiritual side or whether it is on the carnal side. Wearing a wedding ring opens a door to the thought process of "if it is ok to wear a wedding ring then surely it is ok to wear..."
As one of the pastors I have had in my life teaches "what womb did it come out of and where will it take you"
You're half right. I do attend an Apostolic church but I also trim my hair. And I wear a wedding ring so people know I'm married, but no other jewelry, again, because it's just too much effort. I'm a low maintenance woman.
haha....I am a high maintenace woman.The older you get the more buckeros
it takes to maintain that certain style....The good news is I pay for my
own stuff.
The slippery slope counts as a principle with me . . .
The vast majority of the secular people I know wear just the one wedding ring, or the set for the ladies. It is seriously not an issue and certainly not the cause for pride, vanity, jealousy and stumbling, at least among the secular/denominal men I know. Occasionally you'll meet somebody that has multiple rings or one on every finger, but then they've usually got other indicators about them that cause everybody to discern that there is a different class represented in that case.
It just makes me wonder if the Apostolic world is the only place where a simple wedding ring can get between a believer and his God.
Please don't get me wrong. I am not going to approach this any differently than I do other similar issues, i.e., what are your eyes resting on when you think about the issue. My test is this: Are you looking at God, wanting to live for him, give the issue to him, and please him fully, or are you looking at the things of this world, and attempting to decide which of them you can fit into your life without letting go of God?
So I'm sitting here looking at my wedding ring, and I think, this is not nor has it ever been the slightest issue for me. I wear it because my cherished bride gave it to me. I wear it to proudly show that I'm the one and only for my one and only. I wear it night and day. I don't envy the sculpted or jeweled bands of other men, because I frankly don't see the appeal. I find elegance in simplicity. I don't secretly desire a signet ring or such. I take it off when I use files and work on electrical devices. Otherwise, I just don't think about it.
I think I might feel hypocritical if I were take it off prior to a visit to a 'no-rings' church. I certainly don't know how I would explain that act to my children. "I'm still married to your mother even when we're visiting here." But I certainly wouldn't want to cause offense or others to stumble.
I'm trying to challenge my own paradigms, but I don't feel like I'm getting very far with this one. I've had my sins under the blood and the Holy Ghost for all these years, more years than I've worn the ring, and now, all of a sudden, *poof* I'm sinning by wearing a ring? I'm open minded but I'm still not sure I see it.
The enemy rejoices that so many people are constantly focused on the flesh. Whether its the way some one dresses, or how they wear their hair, or whether they have on some jewelry, or have applied some makeup, ......doesn't matter. He's just plain happy that folks are more interested in the flesh than they are in Jesus Christ.
We used to sing a chorus that said, "Let's talk about Jesus, the Prince of Peace is He, the Lord of All, Supreme, throughout eternity. The Great I Am, the Way, the Truth, the Life, the Door, Let's talk about Jesus more and more.
Today, the emphasis has shifted to, "Let's talk about jewelry, hair, makeup, clothing." Jesus said that it's when we lift Him up that folks are drawn to Him. OPs shouldn't wonder why there is so few being drawn to Christ, when they have allowed themselves to be so preoccupied with the flesh instead of Christ.
ahem....I disagree.We have been to the Treeces church and I did not
notice that they were ultra cons.He's pre trib anyway and most ultracons
are post.He did have a great doctrine on UFO's my last prophecy conference trip there though.:sshhh
I said Brother Treece taught what most cons/even ultra cons teach on a large number of issues. most in fact.
I did not say the church was UltraCon.
You are right. they are not ultra. but they are very much in the mainstream of the UPCI....which is what they are supposed to be.
and Elder Epley would take exception to your comment on post trib and his peeps.
__________________ If I do something stupid blame the Lortab!
Some apostolics don't wear wedding rings. Some do.
Those that don't wear rings have everything from a personal conviction to respect for the convictions of others to a conviction that wearing rings are a sin for everybody.
Those that do wear rings can do so in simplicity or in obsession. They can cause others to stumble with jealousy or a spirit of competition.
It looks to me like the stances on wedding rings are cultural - in both camps. Those that don't wear rings inherited their preference from their church culture, and those that do wear rings do so in recognition of the prevailing culture.
I know the admonition against costly array, so let us just consider the case of a simple wedding band - the nationally-accepted way of signifying marital status in our culture.
1 Timothy 2:8
I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting. 9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;
10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.
11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.
1 Peter 3:2
While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear.
3 Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;
4 But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.
And I Peter talks about adornment with gold (although this one if taken literally also teaches against women wearing clothing) as a means of enticing a wayward husband to attend church.
So I can see that we have bible that discourages women from indulging in the vanity of excessive or expensive decoration. But mainly it is about using such decoration as a means of attracting attention to self or to Christianity - not an outright ban in and of itself. But it doesn't mention rings, it doesn't mention men, and it doesn't mention an outward cultural indicator of marital status.
As an aside, I think it is more useful for men to wear wedding rings, because women tend to be more mindful of propriety when they are "in the market" for a husband. The sight of a ring tells a woman she needs to visit the next aisle.
So here is the question on my mind this morning:
If you don't wear a wedding ring, what is the reason, what is the biblical verse or principal that backs it up?
If you do wear a wedding ring, where do you find biblical support for your practice?
I'd like to pre-empt the wise guys by saying that the response "because I'm not married" is hereby deemed null, void, uninteresting, obvious, and dull. If you are unmarried, answer in the hypothetical with your current beliefs, please.
I don't wear a wedding ring because of personal conviction.
I think I see how you are getting here. Thanks again for explaining your position.
I look at it like they were not to esteem costly clothing and jewelry, or to use it to attempt to draw people to Christ. In other words, try not to stand out in the crowd or draw attention to yourself, but let the focus be on God, and let the adorning of your heart with a meek spirit full of the fruits of the Holy Ghost be what draws men to God.
Even the poorest among us can manage to scrounge up a simple wedding band. I do not see it as a great divider between the 'haves' and the 'have-nots.' These days, many men are choosing jewel-encrusted wedding rings for themselves. What I haven't seen is people braiding gold into their hair.
I believe my simple, smooth gold wedding ring does more good than harm. People that see me with my kids on the weekend on an outing with "just Daddy" can see that I'm not just another poor slob with weekend visitation rights and a heap-o'-child-support payments to make. Hey look, some people can stay married after they have children!
It also prevents the lion's share of "conversations" that might lead to temptation. Well, maybe not in my case . . . .
Brother Epley, what do the bride and groom exchange as a token in weddings in your church?
I don't see how the focus of those scriptures needs to be an "either/or" type of thing. I agree the weightier point of the scriptures is to let Christ shine through us, but that doesn't take away from the part about not wearing costly array, gold, etc.
There is more Scripture against the preoccupation of most Pentecostals with eating and drinking than there is on this issue of rings. Yet, I hear not a word about the obvious sin of many preachers sitting on Pentecostal platforms looking as if they could go into labor almost any minute. Tackling this issue could actually save lives! A preacher who looks nine months pregnant, although he wouldn't wear a ring is rather inconsistent I think.
Soooo, because one area is being neglected and another isn't preachers are supposed to feel bad about preaching the one they do preach?
I wear a wedding ring and have felt no conviction for it.If i did i would remove it.I was raised not to wear jewelry ,but i have abandoned my raising and seek after the will of God rather than the traditions of man.
Hang on just a minute. How can you on one hand say you are willing to remove it for conviction's sake and then turn around and suggest that not wearing jewelry is a man made tradition?