Rico, cheapened holiness? You must have forgotten who you are speaking to. This is the guy who has been all over the map, who has fell for every wind of doctrine out there, even "standardless holiness". I have been there. There is no holiness. They try to have a good attitude, but they most have a form of godliness but deny the power thereof. This is one area I am somewhat thankful for what I have been through.
Holiness must be inward, yes. But, if it is not outer as well, then it is not true holiness. I have known people to have the outer standards and not have it inwardly. This is about 5% of the saints I have experienced. The rest have it down pat.
The scriptures presented show forth that holiness is in every area of life. Dress is included. You must be holy in all, or you are not holy at all, period. You want to limit it to inward, which truly cheapens it. If it is truly in you, then it will come out of you. If it is in your heart, you will simply stop being like the world.
Also [I desire] that women should adorn themselves modestly and appropriately and sensibly in seemly apparel, not with [elaborate] hair arrangement or gold or pearls or expensive clothing, But by doing good deeds (deeds in themselves good and for the good and advantage of those contacted by them), as befits women who profess reverential fear for and devotion to God. (1 Timothy 2:9-10 AMP)
The woman shall not wear that which pertains to a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment, for all that do so are an abomination to the Lord your God. (Deuteronomy 22:5 AMP)
For I am the Lord, I do not change; that is why you, O sons of Jacob, are not consumed. (Malachi 3:6 AMP)
Jesus Christ (the Messiah) is [always] the same, yesterday, today, [yes] and forever (to the ages). (Hebrews 13:8 AMP)
If God said it was an abomination before, this does not change. He does not change. Or, shall we say that God has now changed His mind on what He hates?
Sorry Rico, but it is still holiness in all, or nothing is holy at all.
Brother, I don't see anyone arguing against modesty. This is something people like you never seem to acknowledge. I have yet to see anyone on these forums argue in favor of immodesty in dressing. The argument is against legislating what modesty means by coming up with these ridiculous dress codes. You can't wear this, you have to wear that, that sort of thing. That's what I meant by asking for a documented sermon or proof on what early Christians believed. Show me where your idea of women not wearing pants is the same as what they believed back then. Show me where they preached against short sleeves. Show me where they preached any of these supposed holiness dress standards that have become the litmus test for holiness today. If it was as important as some of you make it sound then surely y'all could find some proof, even historical proof.
i love to hear bro tenny preach. looking forward to hearing him at La camp meeting this week.
I sent him a text yesterday and asked him when he is preaching, he is the bible teacher during the day.
I will be going on thursday to hear him and will stay for that night.
I'd like to see some proof, either scriptural or historical, that shows early Christians dressed differently than the people around them. Just give me one documented clothesline message from that time frame, just one. It saddens me that the apostolic church has taken one of the most sacred aspects of living for God, namely holiness, and reduced it to a dress code.
Rico,
This is a liberal strawman! If all of society was modest we, today, would dress no differently than the rest of society. I can assure you that IF there were identifying dress standards for the ungodly in scripture, none of the early church would have dared to dress like the ungodly.
I find it sad that you and others would dare to reduce the apostolic church to one that has reduced one of the most sacred aspects of living for God, namely holiness, and reduced it to a dress code! Your statement is unintentionally false, but false never-the-less!
I was referring to the constant caricatures of the hard-hearted controlling dictator often referred to on here as being the "last of the breed," the uneducated browbeater who insists on still preaching the stifling standards of repression.
Yet, one would think that from this constant complaint and focus that they would be far more accepting of any outward holiness message if only it came from kind, reasoned, and progressive men.
Josh,
If we do not believe in the legalistic approach old time Pentecost takes (not to mention the extra biblical approach) then why would it matter to us if this error is being propogated by someone perceived as an ultra con or someone perceived as progressive?
Wrong is wrong and right is right. I don't care who is saying the words.
I can't believe you honestly thought that TFT would get some kind of pass on what we believe is error because a lot of you think he his "liberal" or "charismatic".
That would be like a preacher in the ultra con camp making some positive statement about using TV or something like that and us acting like we are shocked when the rest of the ultra cons don't agree with him since it is coming from their "camp".
I note that the sermon may be from 2003. I am surprised by the sermon and even more surprised that one would close with statements picked out of Tertullian's arguments about women's attire.
Tertullian believed in addition to what was noted; that women were the gateway of the devil and that it was wrong to wear clothing that had been dyed a different color than its natural state (after all sheep weren't naturally purple). He was adamant that all women everywhere should be veiled.
However, the scariest part of the closing was in putting forth the idea that standards are designed to hold the faith forever.
Say what????
Modesty? Yes!! Of course. But let's be real for our culture and time. If men aren't expected to wear white robes [down to their feet]; then why use such a verse as a standard against shorts as opposed to pants too?
And if the Isrealites dressed distinctly and so then should we... get the men involved. NOT just the women. Why are women to dress distinctly and ministers to dress like their culture would expect of them?
Finally, let's not suggest that God doesn't want us altering our bodies if we are going to be ok with men shaving. Likewise; let's HONESTLY recognize that distinction of the sexes would be much more obvious if men didn't shave.
Standards are not what holds our faith forever (even if they were consistent which they certainly are not). Standards proposed by Tertillian didn't save the church from Cathalicism and the dark ages. Why would we imagine that such is a lifeboat of faith today?
Survival in a Storm
I watched a show/re-enaactment of five people trying to survive in the Ocean for a week on a raft that was NEVER INTENDED TO BE USED AS A SURVIVAL DEVISE. They were without food or water; and sharks were following them because of the blood trail they left because one of them was wounded in the storm...
After the show was over and I thought about it a few days; I told my husband that nobody had to die (as three of them did). We backed up the show to see the beginning again; where their yacht was sinking.
A couple of people ran for the very VISIBLE RAFT and threw it overboard; while one man by himself struggled with a compact capsule about the size of a suitcase; that when activated would pop up like a giant floating tent with specific items for survival such as a gps tracking system; something that made salt water safe to drink, and mirrors for signalling, etc.
The problem was that a couple people had already gone for the visible raft and weren't there to help with the capsule of survival. The man who wrestled with it on his own; could not hold onto it by himself in the storm and after a few hours it blew away while those on the raft looked on.
If the raft wouldn't have been there; I believe the people would have done everything they needed to do; to secure the capsule with the life surviving gear inside.
Trusting in the Invisible
Likewise; we are told to put on the whole armor of God. An armor that isn't visible to the naked eye and so too often we may cling to tradition because its visible and there is clearly a storm raging around us.
The church needs to reach for the harder things than tradition. The church needs to put on the whole armor of God that she may withstand the evil of the day and the church needs to pray always.
On Christ the solid rock I stand! All other ground is sinking sand...
This is a liberal strawman! If all of society was modest we, today, would dress no differently than the rest of society. I can assure you that IF there were identifying dress standards for the ungodly in scripture, none of the early church would have dared to dress like the ungodly.
I find it sad that you and others would dare to reduce the apostolic church to one that has reduced one of the most sacred aspects of living for God, namely holiness, and reduced it to a dress code! Your statement is unintentionally false, but false never-the-less!
How does devaluing the sacred cow(standards) have anything to do with holiness? That is a statement of huge misguided proportions - the two have NOTHING in common!
Linear Mode
