Old way of Holiness Standard do we need to keep?

[CAD/JPY]

<In response to old paths post, but not directly to them as a person>
Thank you for the good post. I am always open for reasonable discussion. I wish more of this could happen in our district conferences.

I do recognize that there are other examples in the Bible where people were strong, but they did not become prideful. My reason for referring to the example of Uzziah is because the scripture clearly says "his heart was lifted up". (II Chr. 26:16) If you read the text, he was basically told he was wrong and asked to leave. However, Uzziah's answer to the confrontation of his "inaccurate" spiritual beliefs was to become angry at the priests. It was while he was angry that he was smitten with leprosy! Had he not become angry, which was a result of pride in his heart, perhaps he would have felt repentance and quietly left the temple... thus allowing his "inaccurate" beliefs to be easily dealt with. However, the pride that was in his heart started a quest to become more religious, and the pride that was in his heart would not listen to the reason of the anointed priests as they referred to historic scripture and the will of God. When people become prideful, they often become more religious.

I understand your comments on modesty and the illustration of women perhaps immodestly exposing a part of their bodies that would be a stumbling block to a man. I have heard it said all my life "a pastor must draw a line". So I must make some comments on this:
What is wrong with allowing godly women in the church to feel after the Holy Ghost regarding what sleeve length is acceptable?
Why does a godly woman need the pastor to define those lines?
What are those poor men with the stumbling block issue going to do when we bring sinners to church??
Maybe a pastor should consider preaching about allowing the Holy Ghost to convict you on where to draw your lines... AND understanding that what God requires of you, may not be what he requires of me.

Which brings me to the example of Timothy being circumcised. Just for the record, if you read that passage, you will see that Paul asked Timothy to be circumcised after the Jerusalem meeting, but before they went through the cities to deliver "the decrees for to keep." (Acts 16:3-4) We have one example here that clearly demonstrates Paul's reasoning for this "physical standard" was cultural. It is stated clearly, "circumcised him because of the Jews". I would be careful with using this illustration as proof that a pastor can ask for non-biblical, "physical" standards of saints in the church, even if they are only cultural standards. Timothy was clearly leadership, he was going to be involved with delivering the letters that established the decree of non-circumcision, and also be preaching the Word. To take this example, and then apply that to saints in a church… well, I just think that is reaching pretty far.

I agree with your pastor. We shouldn’t be discussing holiness with visitors that we are trying to win to the Lord. But what do you tell people when they ask an intelligent question? Does this scare us that we might be putting a stumbling block before them, and if so WHY?

You make an interesting comment, and I quote “Jesus didn't teach about hair, women dressing modest, not the wearing of gold/silver etc. Why? Because they wouldn't be able to bear it BEFORE they get the Holy Ghost. But, at some point AFTER one is born again and grows in grace and in knowledge, they are going to learn the other things that Jesus wants and should be willing to obey and submit and do it for him to be pleasing and acceptable to him.”
Ok, this raises a serious question for me. IF that above statement is truth, then what about all the Holy Ghost filled people who haven’t been convicted with certain standards that we preach as gospel?
What about the new saints that come to church for months, and then years… and they don’t change? The woman wear pants, makeup and jewelry, and the men still own a television.
What about the ones who just don’t see it the way that some of us do? Aren’t they filled with the same Holy Ghost as I am??

For the record, I am not suggesting we throw holiness out the window in order to try and reach the lost.
I am suggesting we redefine our definition of what holiness truly is….
I am suggesting that we honestly and accurately research scripture….
I am suggesting that we not be scared to say “I’m wrong” or “We made a mistake.”…
I am suggesting that we accept that some things in the New Testament were clearly cultural issues, and the application of those examples for today is that we follow the same pattern when seeking answers to cultural issues that we face today….

I am suggesting that perhaps in our strength of having the truth and being blessed of God that we have become prideful in our "holiness standards" of outlying appearance... so much so, that we compromise the intention of the Word of God and the conviction of the Holy Spirit.

I am suggesting that maybe we have taken some things a little too far...

Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. 2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. 3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. 4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. 5 For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith.

[Bowas]

Originally Posted by CAD/JPY

<In response to old paths post, but not directly to them as a person>
Thank you for the good post. I am always open for reasonable discussion. I wish more of this could happen in our district conferences.

I do recognize that there are other examples in the Bible where people were strong, but they did not become prideful. My reason for referring to the example of Uzziah is because the scripture clearly says "his heart was lifted up". (II Chr. 26:16) If you read the text, he was basically told he was wrong and asked to leave. However, Uzziah's answer to the confrontation of his "inaccurate" spiritual beliefs was to become angry at the priests. It was while he was angry that he was smitten with leprosy! Had he not become angry, which was a result of pride in his heart, perhaps he would have felt repentance and quietly left the temple... thus allowing his "inaccurate" beliefs to be easily dealt with. However, the pride that was in his heart started a quest to become more religious, and the pride that was in his heart would not listen to the reason of the anointed priests as they referred to historic scripture and the will of God. When people become prideful, they often become more religious.

I understand your comments on modesty and the illustration of women perhaps immodestly exposing a part of their bodies that would be a stumbling block to a man. I have heard it said all my life "a pastor must draw a line". So I must make some comments on this:
What is wrong with allowing godly women in the church to feel after the Holy Ghost regarding what sleeve length is acceptable?
Why does a godly woman need the pastor to define those lines?
What are those poor men with the stumbling block issue going to do when we bring sinners to church??
Maybe a pastor should consider preaching about allowing the Holy Ghost to convict you on where to draw your lines... AND understanding that what God requires of you, may not be what he requires of me.

Which brings me to the example of Timothy being circumcised. Just for the record, if you read that passage, you will see that Paul asked Timothy to be circumcised after the Jerusalem meeting, but before they went through the cities to deliver "the decrees for to keep." (Acts 16:3-4) We have one example here that clearly demonstrates Paul's reasoning for this "physical standard" was cultural. It is stated clearly, "circumcised him because of the Jews". I would be careful with using this illustration as proof that a pastor can ask for non-biblical, "physical" standards of saints in the church, even if they are only cultural standards. Timothy was clearly leadership, he was going to be involved with delivering the letters that established the decree of non-circumcision, and also be preaching the Word. To take this example, and then apply that to saints in a church… well, I just think that is reaching pretty far.

I agree with your pastor. We shouldn’t be discussing holiness with visitors that we are trying to win to the Lord. But what do you tell people when they ask an intelligent question? Does this scare us that we might be putting a stumbling block before them, and if so WHY?

You make an interesting comment, and I quote “Jesus didn't teach about hair, women dressing modest, not the wearing of gold/silver etc. Why? Because they wouldn't be able to bear it BEFORE they get the Holy Ghost. But, at some point AFTER one is born again and grows in grace and in knowledge, they are going to learn the other things that Jesus wants and should be willing to obey and submit and do it for him to be pleasing and acceptable to him.”
Ok, this raises a serious question for me. IF that above statement is truth, then what about all the Holy Ghost filled people who haven’t been convicted with certain standards that we preach as gospel?
What about the new saints that come to church for months, and then years… and they don’t change? The woman wear pants, makeup and jewelry, and the men still own a television.
What about the ones who just don’t see it the way that some of us do? Aren’t they filled with the same Holy Ghost as I am??

For the record, I am not suggesting we throw holiness out the window in order to try and reach the lost.
I am suggesting we redefine our definition of what holiness truly is….
I am suggesting that we honestly and accurately research scripture….
I am suggesting that we not be scared to say “I’m wrong” or “We made a mistake.”…
I am suggesting that we accept that some things in the New Testament were clearly cultural issues, and the application of those examples for today is that we follow the same pattern when seeking answers to cultural issues that we face today….

I am suggesting that perhaps in our strength of having the truth and being blessed of God that we have become prideful in our "holiness standards" of outlying appearance... so much so, that we compromise the intention of the Word of God and the conviction of the Holy Spirit.

I am suggesting that maybe we have taken some things a little too far...

Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. 2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. 3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. 4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. 5 For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith.

CAD/JPY,
This is just to let you know, I prefer EUR/JPY.

Originally Posted by Bowas

CAD/JPY,
This is just to let you know, I prefer EUR/JPY.

lol

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by Mrs. LPW

I think it's safe to assume we want the covering God gave Adam and Eve after the fall!

The older one gets the more we agree!

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by angelwannabe

What? Am I being banned or something, what did I say wrong? I've read some post here and confrontation seemed to be the norm. Do you supposed to be here a while before confronting people on there post. Is this a place to make friends or to comment and make remarks that then become a discussion. Hey, Simplyme, thanks for the POSITIVE reply, but be careful I may disagree with you too.

Hey, you are too new to talk like that, we have seniority, so watch yourself.

[theoldpaths]

Originally Posted by Eliseus

Thanks for your response, brother (you are a brother right? If not, forgive me, sister! lol) Sorry I didn't respond sooner.

Can I ask you two questions?

1. Is not Moses a type of Christ, rather than a type of the local pastor?

2. Is there any scripture which shows us that 'pastor' refers to a single man having final authority and say-so in a local congregation?

In fact, would not what we call 'pastor' actually be a 'bishop' (to use the language of the KJV)? That is, an 'overseer', an episkopos? Which, if I am not mistaken, is used synonymously in the Bible with the term 'elder'?

By the way, as for 'rule by committee', I do not believe that is biblical at all. The church is to be ruled by Jesus Christ, through the Spirit.

I am a brother.

I believe Moses was a type of Christ, but also believe that Moses was a man called of God to lead his people. The scriptures also refer to Moses as the servant of God. One time God wanted to destroy Israel, but Moses interceded on behalf of the people so that God would not destroy them. This reminds me of when Jesus taught about the owner of some land who had a tree that he sought fruit from for years and wanted to cut it down; but the husbandman (singular) interceded on behalf of the tree and asked for 1 more year whereby he would dung it about and give it special attention, and then after that year, if it still did not bear fruit, then to cut it down. In this regard , I see Moses acting like the husbandman and interceding on behalf of God's people.

If you look up "Pastor" in the OT under Strong's, you'll see that it means "Shepherd". Incidentally, a shepherd has a staff and a rod, and the purpose of the rod is for correction.

Also Pastor is one of the offices of the 5 fold ministry listed in Eph 4:11 while elders are not. Those in the ministry are all elders, but not all elders are in the 5 fold ministry. We see this in that Peter while he was an apostle also referred to himself as an elder.

1Pe 5:1 The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed:

1Ti 5:17 Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.

This last verse seems to imply that a person can be an elder but NOT labour in the word and doctrine; that is, they are not in the ministry.

Also "Pastors" in Eph 4:11 in Strong's translates to "Shepherd" as well.

Reference for a singular ruler:

Rom 12:8 Or he that exhorteth, on exhortation: he that giveth, let him do it with simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence; he that sheweth mercy, with cheerfulness.

According to tradition, Timothy was a young Pastor at Ephesus; who was the mentor to Timothy who could give him advise about how to Pastor? Paul, his elder. What advise did Paul give Timothy?

2Ti 4:2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.

1Ti 5:20 Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear.

2Ti 2:2 And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.

God bless.

[theoldpaths]

In response to CAD/JPY - Post 1 of 2:

I have no problem with godly women feeling, praying, studying about sleeve length. I wonder if God in his word has ever given an example on sleeve length or robe length? I wonder if God in his word has ever given his people an example concerning clothes and dress and the length of robes and being able to look up a robe and discover a person's nakedness? I wonder if the OT priests clothing could be a type and a shadown to NT saints who are now kings and priests unto God?

When it comes to what God requires of hair, we have 1 Cor 11. Now in 1 Cor 11 we read that men of God are to have short hair. But notice that short is not an exact measurement, there is no base line identified in 1 Cor 11. So this begs the question, what is short? I wonder if the OT God has an example of men having short hair and describing what it should be like? I wonder if God in His word ever described how the hair of the priest in the OT should be?

Now there is a difference b/n what God requires of saints and what God requires of sinners. It is more of an offense if a sister knows what is required of her to NOT be stumblingblock unto her brothers in the Lord, but willingly and knowingly disobeys; compared to a sinner who has no idea what God requires. The church can be somewhat longsuffering for a period of time to a sinner who dresses like a Jezebel harlot, but that does not give license to God's holy woman who have been born again, to dress the same way. Again, some things written in the epistles cannot be borne by those who have not yet rec'd the Holy Ghost and been born again. You don't clean the fish before you catch it.

I believe God is a just and fair God, therefore, in terms of God wanting all his people to be holy, why would God require some things of you but not of me, remember in terms of holiness. Would that be fair? 1 Cor 11 dealing with hair was for all saved men and for all saved women - 1 rule for all; and if any are contentious about that, the church has no such custom on being contentious with the ordinances that Paul laid out. How did he start off that chapter? Follow me as I follow Christ.

Now in terms of strengths and weaknesses, brothers and sisters are different in that respect. Your weakness may not be my weakness and your strength may not be my strength. Therefore in terms of things that are my weaknesses, I believe God requires that I be very careful; similarly, in what things are your weaknesses, I should be very careful. In that I will agree that there are differences b/n you and I and what God would require of you and I. However, I will also agree that there are some things written that are required of both you and I.

Incidentally, is there any scripture supporting that what God requires of you is different than what God requires of me?

Actually, if you start at Acts 14, you will find that the issue started at Antioch and the solution was communicated at Antioch before Acts 16. But I will agree that in Acts 16, after the solution was communicated to where the problem started, the ordinances did get communicated to other cities. So Timothy did get circumcized after the decision was made and started to be communicated; who had him circumcized? Paul. Did he do it after gaining knowledge of the decision? Yes he did.

The point is that although Paul could find no scripture to show Timothy that he should obey God's word to be circumcized, Timothy still submitted himself unto Paul and did something that was NOT written. Incidentally, he did it to not offend them so that he might WIN them.

1Co 10:32 Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:
1Co 10:33 Even as I please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved.

1Co 9:20 And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law;
1Co 9:21 To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.
1Co 9:22 To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.

One could take the above and say that if anything could offend anyone and could possibly keep them from receiving an invitation to come and hear truth and getting saved, it should be avoided.

But I guess some in their own desire to do whatever they want to and not considering others, might just want to do it their own way. But that was NOT the way of Paul and is contrary to what Paul wrote.

It kinda reminds me of the following:

Num 16:1 Now Korah, the son of Izhar, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi, and Dathan and Abiram, the sons of Eliab, and On, the son of Peleth, sons of Reuben, took men:
Num 16:2 And they rose up before Moses, with certain of the children of Israel, two hundred and fifty princes of the assembly, famous in the congregation, men of renown:
Num 16:3 And they gathered themselves together against Moses and against Aaron, and said unto them, Ye take too much upon you, seeing all the congregation are holy, every one of them, and the LORD is among them: wherefore then lift ye up yourselves above the congregation of the LORD?

Kohath basically accussed Moses and Aaron of taking responsibility upon themselves which didn't belong to them. Perhaps Kohath and company felt that certain responsibility that was laid upon Moses and Aaron that should NOT be their responsibility but that some of that responsibility should be Kohath's and his company's; after all, all the congregation is holy. Not only that, they accussed Moses and Aaron of lifting themselves up, but it was not Moses and Aaron who lifted themselves up to lead God's people, but it was of God. They were not self-called, self-annointed, self-appointed men, neither were they called, annointed, nor appointed by other men; but they were called, annointed, and appointed of God.

But even tho Moses and Aaron knew they were called of God, what was their reaction to their calling/leadership being called into question? Did they fight and argue with them? Moses' first reaction was to fall on his face.

Num 16:9 Seemeth it but a small thing unto you, that the God of Israel hath separated you from the congregation of Israel, to bring you near to himself to do the service of the tabernacle of the LORD, and to stand before the congregation to minister unto them?
Num 16:10 And he hath brought thee near to him, and all thy brethren the sons of Levi with thee: and seek ye the priesthood also?
Num 16:11 For which cause both thou and all thy company are gathered together against the LORD: and what is Aaron, that ye murmur against him?

But God's word reveals in the above that Kohath and his company felt that certain responsibility that was Moses' and Aaron's, rightfully so, should have NOT been Moses' and Aaron's but should have also been Kohath's and his company. They wanted that responsibility to be theirs. Who were they to lead and tell us what to do when we are all the Lord's people and are holy; who do they think they are?

Even tho God may call some in a congregation to preach and may separate some of them to serve the Lord in a special way, they should still submit themselves under the leadership of their Pastor. Just because one may be called to preach of God, but is not yet ready to be sent out, doesn't mean that he should take away the responsibility that God has placed on those whom God calls to lead.

Now in Matt 18, in the context of church discipline, Jesus clearly stated that when the leadership in the church deems its time to bring something before the whole church and when a saint is to now be as a heathen and a publican, Jesus said that he would stand behind what the leadership would decide.

Mat 18:17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.
Mat 18:18 Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
Mat 18:19 Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.

Imagine that, Jesus promising in the future to stand behind what MEN in leadership would decide in judgement. Whatever MEN would bind, Jesus would bind and whatever MEN would loose, Jesus said he would loose.

Do we see an example of this in scripture? Yes we do. We see it concerning the Jews coming to Antioch and saying the Jews must be circumcized and leadership needing to come together to discuss and make a decision concerning it. Incidentally, what men decided "seemed good unto the Holy Ghost"; God somehow through the Holy Ghost gave his mark of approval on it. We also see it by Paul turning over some to Satan for the destruction of the flesh. There are 2 instances of that - 1 to learn not to blaspheme, and the other in 1 Cor 5. It was not FINAL judgement, but that they would learn from it that the spirit may be saved after the destruction of the flesh.

Consequently, another decision that was made in the circumcision conference was that the gentiles were to abstain from meat sacrificed unto idols, from blood, and from things strangled. Now in the absence of words from Jesus and/or his leadership against these things, I would presume that it may have been ok for the gentiles to do these things; however, once the leadership decided on these things, then guess what? They were to be in obedience. They were to submit themselves to them that had the rule over them and to obey.

God bless.

Post 2 to follow...

[theoldpaths]

In response to CAD/JPY - Post 2 of 2:

Now if a visitor asks questions, then holy apostolic people of God should not be afraid to answer them according to the word of God. I believe wisdom should be used though because a sinner cannot bear some of the things that are written in the epistles which is why the epistles were not addressed to sinners but to the saints. Which is why Jesus teach some things in the gospels that appear in the epistles. We don't clean a fish before we catch it; you have to catch it first with the proper bait.

Joh 16:12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.
Joh 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

Now since the above is in scripture, then it is indeed true.

As was stated before, certain responsibilities are upon the shoulders of those whom God calls, annoints, and appoints into leadership positions alone. Even tho others in a local church may be separated into the service of God, they are still under a Pastor and do NOT share in the responsibilites that God has placed upon his leadership alone, regardless of what Kohath says.

Just because a person has graduated from bible colledge does not mean they are called of God to pastor a church. Incidentally, a UPC district superintendent in the Apostolic Man forums has admitted to giving licenses to people that afterwards he realized that he shouldn't have given them licenses. What does this show? This shows that some have been given licenses that should not have been given licenses and perhaps were put into leadership positions, such as Pastoring who should NOT have been. Do you think that there would be a difference b/n a man whom God calls to be a Pastor and gives him certain responsibilities and another man whom God has NOT called to be a Pastor, but somehow finds himself in a position of a Pastor because he was called of MEN and NOT of God? I think so. A true watchman of God has a different perspective than those who are NOT on the watchtower regardless of what they aspire to.

I would think it sad that a person would not change after years of living for God. A tree that is planted in God ground and is being fed with healthy food should grow. If it doesn't grow then something is wrong. Paul in hebrews came across some that should have been teachers by now, but were like those who still needed milk.

Heb 5:12 For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.
Heb 5:13 For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe.
Heb 5:14 But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

Something bad had affected their growth. God's people are to sincerely desire the milk of the word that they may grow thereby; and what is the promise to those born again babes who desire the sincere milk of the word and grow?

Isa 28:9 Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts.

God will teach them knowledge and cause them to understand doctrine. Not just salvation doctrine, but doctrine such as:

- presenting your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy...which is your reasonable service
- loving not the world neither the things that are in the world
- coming out from among them and being separate
- not partaking of the table of idols AND the Lord's table

I wonder what some modern idols in this day and age are? I wonder what are some things the world idolizes these days? Are God's holy people partaking of the table of idols AND the Lord's table?

1Co 10:19 What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing?
1Co 10:20 But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils.
1Co 10:21 Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils.

Now i'm glad that you are not suggesting that we throw holiness out. I am for letting the word of God define what holiness is and also realizing that Jesus knew that situations would come up where the church leadership would have to meet, discuss, pray, fast, and make some decisions; we see this in Acts. Jesus knowing this, said in the Gospel that whatever the leadership would bind/loose that he would stand behind it and even backed it up right after saying that by saying "again I say unto you that if 2 of you shall agree...".

For the record, my pastor has admitted to being wrong from the pulpit and has apologized in public and I agree that a man of God should not be afraid or be to full of pride to do so.

I`m okay with my pastor`s standards, but I can`t speak for other pastor`s standards.

I have very strong opinions concerning tv and movies because I backslid and left a strong upc church and later went to a very loose apostolic church pastored by someone who started it after they were publicly rebuked in a strong UPC church for committing adultery. In that loose church I experimented with watching almost anything on tv, to watching only news, sports, nature shows, documentaries, and to fasting from tv in that loose church. My experience was in that loose church that I felt stronger when I fasted from tv and I found myself going back to the strong UPC church where I was born again in and making everything right with why I backslid in the first place. Now I feel a lot stronger and very stable. To God be all the glory.

God bless.

[SavedLou]

the more years i spend in the UPC the more inconsistencies i see as far as some standards. we will use one verse and leave the other. examples: with the hair issue, we will take this at face value "it's a shame for a woman to be shorn" and then try to explain this one away "it's a shame for a woman to speak in church". we say one is a "cultural" issue. inconsistent. with jewelry, we will take the "women adorn yourselves with modesty...not with gold, pearls" and leave this off "...AND costly array". so we have nice holy women with no makeup or jewelry but wearing very expensive suits. inconsistent. we pick and choose. there are actually tons of scriptures where jewelry is spoken of positively but we ignore those verses. just food for thought.

[chosenbyone]

Originally Posted by SavedLou

the more years i spend in the UPC the more inconsistencies i see as far as some standards. we will use one verse and leave the other. examples: with the hair issue, we will take this at face value "it's a shame for a woman to be shorn" and then try to explain this one away "it's a shame for a woman to speak in church". we say one is a "cultural" issue. inconsistent. with jewelry, we will take the "women adorn yourselves with modesty...not with gold, pearls" and leave this off "...AND costly array". so we have nice holy women with no makeup or jewelry but wearing very expensive suits. inconsistent. we pick and choose. there are actually tons of scriptures where jewelry is spoken of positively but we ignore those verses. just food for thought.

Thanks for sharing this morning. lol...

Really, many here know exactly where you were coming from in this post. My opinion, modesty is mandated by the Lord and he will convict you if you cross the line. Standards should be personal between you and the Lord and not Sister Sally on the fourth pew on the right.

Unfortunately, after witnessing so many folks who became disillusioned with the mandated standards which caused them to leave the UPC, I saw many let go of one thing after another until they let go of God. That truly scared me, because many of these folks were ones that really walked with God. What they thought was new found liberty became their stubbing block. After years of conditioning to dress and behave a certain way, many of them never learned the meaning of "moderation".

OK....I don't know who put all these soap boxes in my office. I keep on stepping on them.