Cosmetics???

[LUKE2447]

Oh TR I am not going to be able to respond as I will be out for a while do to travel but thanks for the discussion. Sadly in this area I have to disagree. Hey we agree on alot of other stuff though! LOL! Take care!

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by coadie

You aren't even honest enough to admit you don't know what Mennonites all teach.
Actually I was never taught the trinitarian doctrine till I came to a Oneness church.

I do understand there are several anabaptist denominations. People like yourself don't even know they did not come out of the reformation and are not protestants.
When under educated people like yourself make sweeping broad generalizations, that tells me they talk first and never explore what they announce.

do you know why you attack people you do not know?
Are you insecure? The topic is cosmetics and if folks don't validate your feelings, attacking is an easy out? Can you explain why you didn't know that cosmetics in terms of decoration came from Egypt?

Does your pastor know?

Look dude, you are pushing the envelop here!

Telling TRF what he does and doesn't know - - not within your powers.

Accusing him of attacking? Please. Let's go back and pick out all the insults you have hurled at many of us. You've thrown at least two or three at me alone.

We KNOW why you attack. You can't answer the questions.

[Monkeyman]

Coadie is a faker, I can tell by reading his posts, circular poser poster syndrome (we've seen them before) round and round they come and go....

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by Monkeyman

Coadie is a faker, I can tell by reading his posts, circular poser poster syndrome (we've seen them before) round and round they come and go....

Yep!

[coadie]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

Look dude, you are pushing the envelop here!

Telling TRF what he does and doesn't know - - not within your powers.
Accusing him of attacking? Please. Let's go back and pick out all the insults you have hurled at many of us. You've thrown at least two or three at me alone.

We KNOW why you attack. You can't answer the questions.

I was a Mennonite for 50 years and have no idea what all the teachings are. But he does?
Most don't even belong to a denomination. Of three of their colleges and universities, my family members have been on boards. I have a handle on a few of their schools. Back to cosmetics. can you hold the snarky posts and stay on topic?


The funnny thing is I know how to read when people ask questions and really do NOT want the answer.
sometimes people like yourself ask questions just to get a reaction. It drives people nuts when they try to trigger a response and don't get one.

Painting one;s face is the same thing. it is intended to get a response from other people.
In raising a healthy daughter, her needs are for daddy to tell her she is lovely.

My daughter called me from 5th avenue a few weeks ago. she is lovely and i tell her. she was invited to new York city for a new balance track meet. She had time to shop. she doesn't do make up. She is one of the top scholars in a very prestigious university. She graduates in December and already has 2 job offers. She has an excelllent mind and it will thrive for 50 years even when some things start to sag and wrinkle. She know why people spend billions on paint that has to be removed every night.

Cosmetics is a demeaning viewpoint imposed on women. men truly for the majority see women for who they really are and are not impressed with what women want to look like.

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by coadie

I was a Mennonite for 50 years and have no idea what all the teachings are. But he does?
Most don't even belong to a denomination. Of three of their colleges and universities, my family members have been on boards. I have a handle on a few of their schools. Back to cosmetics. can you hold the snarky posts and stay on topic?


The funnny thing is I know how to read when people ask questions and really do NOT want the answer.
sometimes people like yourself ask questions just to get a reaction. It drives people nuts when they try to trigger a response and don't get one.

Painting one;s face is the same thing. it is intended to get a response from other people.
In raising a healthy daughter, her needs are for daddy to tell her she is lovely.

My daughter called me from 5th avenue a few weeks ago. she is lovely and i tell her. she was invited to new York city for a new balance track meet. She had time to shop. she doesn't do make up. She is one of the top scholars in a very prestigious university. She graduates in December and already has 2 job offers. She has an excelllent mind and it will thrive for 50 years even when some things start to sag and wrinkle. She know why people spend billions on paint that has to be removed every night.

Cosmetics is a demeaning viewpoint imposed on women. men truly for the majority see women for who they really are and are not impressed with what women want to look like.

My daughter baked a cake yesterday, oh and she's lovely too.

[rgcraig]

So, you think my picture/what I look like in real life too is "painted" to get a reaction?

You are so versed in cosmetics - what cosmetics are on my face in my picture?

[coadie]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

My daughter baked a cake yesterday, oh and she's lovely too.

for her dad?

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by coadie

for her dad?

For her husband.

[TRFrance]

I know it's a long post Luke, but bear with me, brother:

Originally Posted by LUKE2447

Come on TR your not stupid and know all the scriptures and what would be the point of repeating? Also it doesn't matter it is direct or not as many things we do in life are based on the principle.

I know all the scriptures that speak against cosmetics? Actually, no I dont. Please share then with me if they exist.

Also, "the point of repeating" would be to show that there are even a few verses of scripture that speak against this practice you are condemning.

Really, your answer sounds like another way of saying "come on TR, you know I dont really have scripture for this... that's why I keep talking about 'scriptural principle' or the 'church fathers'. Why are you giving me a hard time on this?"

Originally Posted by LUKE2447

personaly if you want a direct answer. glossy lips most of the time is used to bring attraction. Not against lip balm but come one you know how girls like to make the lips look lucious and it def draws attention. I won't/can't wear X but hmm Y actually looks good too and better.... Colors and radical type clothing can do that as well. I am not sure directly if "a" color is a issue though. The point of eye shadow? sorry nothing but glamourizing. Wedding rings or something of a symbol and very plain I have no problem with. Though my first question is do you really need it? The simple answer usually is no. Should it be expensive in which you bring attention besides it simply being there? No, plain as it simply signifies marriage. Much like signet rings had a true purpose of being attached to the wearer so can a simple ring. The ring though should not bring glory to the hand it is on besides the glory of what it represents. Point of wearing high heals besides being stupid and hurting oneself? At what length will women go to look the part. This is a excellent example. Talking about stupid. sheesh. Women IMO make the hair something that it is not supposed to be. They might not wear gold in them etc.. but Lord have mercy they sure will make it the biggest monsterous thing known this side of the Mississippi. Oh and the early church fathers did talk about this.

So high-heels are wrong too, apparently. (No scripture for that... but I guess its wrong in principle.)

Also, in essence "functional jewelry is ok, but ornamental jewelry is not". Yep. I've heard that before. Only problem is, scripture doesnt make such a disctinction. Truth be told, that's just a man-made way of justifying a "wedding ring exemption" to their no-jewelry rule.

By the way, Luke... Question for you.
Since you think ornamental jewelry is wrong... Why do you suppose the Lord spoke in a positive way regarding jewelry in Ezekiel 16? (I'll just post some of the key verses here):

10 I clothed you with an embroidered dress and put leather sandals on you. I dressed you in fine linen and covered you with costly garments. 11 I adorned you with jewelry: I put bracelets on your arms and a necklace around your neck, 12and I put a ring on your nose, earrings on your ears and a beautiful crown on your head. 13 So you were adorned with gold and silver; your clothes were of fine linen and costly fabric and embroidered cloth. Your food was fine flour, honey and olive oil. You became very beautiful and rose to be a queen.

Since (supposedly) any jewelry that beautifies the body only appeals to pride, and is sinful... why would God have spoken approvingly of Israel being decked in jewelry that He gave her??

Originally Posted by LUKE2447

That's fine because if you go there you have nowhere to run as it is consistent and you have no support for you position.

Nowhere to run? I have nothing to run from. You're the one running to the "church fathers" for help on this since you cant find even a shred of scripture to lean on. Your unwillingness to quote even one verse of scripture is an acknowledgement in a sense, that the scriptures dont back you on this.

Originally Posted by LUKE2447

That's fine because if you go there you have nowhere to run as it is consistent and you have no support for you position.

Come on Luke. You're no dummy.
This here reflects one of the essential principles of logic, reason, and debate:

If I say I dont believe we should cosmetics is a sin... and you say it IS a sin... then the onus is on YOU to show biblically that it is a sin. And you have ZERO biblical support for your position... we both know that. You havent even quoted a single verse.

My decision to allow people liberty under God to exercise personal preference in this matter (since I dont see that scriputure, or "scriptural principle condemns it) does not need for me to find scripture to back me up.The one pointing the finger at his brother/sister is the one who needs to find scripture regarding what he's condemning.

Similarly, I might not like Mohawk haircuts... but if a kid in my church shows up with a Mohawk I'm not going to condemn him. However, if I found scripture (or scriptural priciple) regarding such a haircut. On the other hand, in my view, when people just dont like something, but choose to impose their personal pereferences on those issues and present it as doctrine, they're just placing unnecessary burdens on people that they know they really cant justify with scripture. I dont like big bright Easter hats, but I dont think I'd want my pastor to preach against big bright Easter hats just because he doesnt like them. After all, maybe the Lord doesnt have a problem with big bright easter hats. Just because I dont like something, doesnt mean the Lord has a problem with it.

That's why we have such wide variation in "standards" even among conservative Apostolic churches around the country. Our own pastors cant even agree on what to ban and what to allow when it comes to this stuff (even though they all will end up claiming "biblical principle" for whatever they choose to preach/teach against)... In the end, a lot of it comes down to "house rules", or "pastor's preference", which I have no problem with if it's taught as being just thats. Unfortunately, too many of our churches try to present it as "doctrine", (especially doctrine with salvational ramifications), and I think that's unfortunate, to say the least.

If you want to have a personal conviction regarding cosmetics, fine. But I'm not sure God wants you going around trying to impose your conviction on others, especially when you have nothing in his Word to support your position.

Blessings,
TRF