To Beard or Not to Beard, That is The Question - Page 36

TK Burk · #**351** 06-21-2019, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by votivesoul

And that was my whole point about trying to solve church problems by going outside of the Scriptures instead of staying within them.

Ok...so, wearing red around Bloods is not a problem with you. Got it. So, for you, a person has to check their common sense at the door to be a Christian.

So incredibly silly...kinda like dealing in questions that gender strife...it's a dead end that you seem to want to explore.

TK Burk · #**352** 06-21-2019, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by votivesoul

Also, will you demonstrate how the kind of teaching you have given us was necessary to "aid the Early Church spread the gospel throughout the various cultures of their world"?

My study was about facial hair. Did you read it at all? You've made it into something else. Wait...isn't that what you're arguing would happen if a church warned their people to not wear known gang colors--that it would become something it never was intended to be? And now you're doing the very thing? Wow...

TK Burk · #**353** 06-21-2019, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by votivesoul

It is clearly implicit because the pollutions of idolatry, that is to say, the fornication and eating raw, strangled animals still with blood in them as part of ritualistic idolatry are actually anti-Torah. Therefore they are Torah mandates that determine heaven or hell for the one(s) who disobey, whether Jew or Gentile.

I know you realize this. It's clear. So, even if James or the others never officially said Gentiles must do these things in order to be saved, their salvation was nonetheless dependent upon their obedience.

You make my point. The Jerusalem Council had every right to make their decisions binding because they had legitimate reasons for making those decisions, specifically they had Torah regulations already in place. The brother did not, as you admit. I agree.

But I also agree with Brother Benincasa's decision, because as far as I can tell from the story, he cared more about his brother's conscience than he did about his Fu Manchu, and rightly so. So, impose upon yourself whatever extra-Biblical mandates you feel you need to in order to gain your brother, instead of risking losing him. Paul said as much about not eating certain foods if they make his brother to offend. But he also made it clear ordering people to abstain from certain foods is a demonic doctrine that cannot be tolerated. So, shave if your close brother is going to offend over it, but never let him command you to shave.

However, we aren't talking in this thread, or at least I wasn't, about a brother asking for a favor, to make peace through an oath. We are or at least I am, talking about elders and leaders who, not just as brothers asking for favors who desire to keep their consciences undefiled, are actually giving orders coupled with threats of a punitive nature if compliance is not received because they claim not complying actually defiles you. These are two very different things.

Did I ever say the church was to "order" the congregation to not wear gang-related colors?

Are you again making those calves into cows?