How Many "3 Steppers" Do We Have On Aff???

Originally Posted by Sheltiedad

But at some point, someone had to decide that wing-tips were okay right? Since they have not always been around....

By the way, my wing-tips look like the 2nd pair you posted... so I think I am okay? I do like the waxed shoe-strings, but it seems that that could be perceived as vain... should I just just plain cotton shoestrings?

Yes, I would suggest plain cotton black shoe strings.

[Joseph Miller]

Originally Posted by Caston Smith

Well, for instance if men wear bright crimson red dress shirts; the blood of Jesus Christ is crimson red and we know this from the song written by the PAW Pioneer G. T Haywood "I See A Crimson Stream of Blood", and they are throwing off on the blood ... wouldn't you think?

Another color men should not wear is purple because in Revelation it said the mother harlot had scarlet array. Also the robe Jesus Christ wore before His crucifixion, they mocked Him with a purple robe. So men should refrain from wearing especially those two colors ...

Pink, is definitely too feminine that's totally out of the question.

Me should ONLY wear white dress shirts to church because white is the symbol of purity.

You sure have an uncommon way of looking at things.

Originally Posted by pelathais

So, the "traditions of men" is okay? For many of us it is traditional for men to refrain from shaving their faces smooth like a woman's face, or that of a little boy.

The Roman Catholic Church introduced the tradition of preachers shaving their faces smooth as a sign of submission to the Pope. When he rebelled against Rome, the first thing Martin Luther did was to grow a beard. Same with Calvin and thousands of others.

But today the Apostolics you fellowship and the Roman Catholic Church are the only fellowships that require their ministers to shave their faces smooth.

Why do you follow this Catholic tradition?

II Thessalonians 2:15
Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

There's nothing wrong with traditions as long as they aren't sinful in nature. I believe we have picked up a lot of good things from different ones in church history.

John Wesley for instance ... he preached the message of Holiness and sanctification.

John Calvin-justification by faith. All though I do not adhere to the "alone" part of his teaching, because I believe if one has genuine faith it will produce works (i.e. repentance, water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins etc)

So as you can see there's nothing wrong with holding traditions that are not sinful in nature ...

Goodnight to you all. God bless!

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Caston Smith

Well, for instance if men wear bright crimson red dress shirts; the blood of Jesus Christ is crimson red and we know this from the song written by the PAW Pioneer G. T Haywood "I See A Crimson Stream of Blood", and they are throwing off on the blood ... wouldn't you think?

"throwing off on the blood" ??? I don't know what that phrase means.

Wearing a red shirt is wrong, and GT Haywood is called upon to support this? Nah.

I'm not flashy enough to wear a bright red dress shirt myself, but I would need some sort of Scriptural justification before I tell someone else what to wear or not to wear.

Originally Posted by Caston Smith

Another color men should not wear is purple because in Revelation it said the mother harlot had scarlet array. Also the robe Jesus Christ wore before His crucifixion, they mocked Him with a purple robe. So men should refrain from wearing especially those two colors ...

Why?

Originally Posted by Caston Smith

Pink, is definitely too feminine that's totally out of the question.

I don't go for the pink myself, but I have to admidt that it's just my preference and not anything from the Bible.

Originally Posted by Caston Smith

Me should ONLY wear white dress shirts to church because white is the symbol of purity.

Yet the Apostles of the 1st Century did not restrict themselves to only white tunics, etc. White is symbolic (as most every color is), but to put ones self into the position of telling other people what to wear and not to wear without any real Biblical support seems to me to be a bit presumptuous.

I'm afraid because of the words that I speak in a Bible study, sermon or whenever I'm putting myself out there as speaking for the things of God. I would not add to or take away from what's written in the Book.

[Joseph Miller]

Originally Posted by pelathais

"throwing off on the blood" ??? I don't know what that phrase means.

Wearing a red shirt is wrong, and GT Haywood is called upon to support this? Nah.

I'm not flashy enough to wear a bright red dress shirt myself, but I would need some sort of Scriptural justification before I tell someone else what to wear or not to wear.


Why?
I don't go for the pink myself, but I have to admidt that it's just my preference and not anything from the Bible.

Yet the Apostles of the 1st Century did not restrict themselves to only white tunics, etc. White is symbolic (as most every color is), but to put ones self into the position of telling other people what to wear and not to wear without any real Biblical support seems to me to be a bit presumptuous.

I'm afraid because of the words that I speak in a Bible study, sermon or whenever I'm putting myself out there as speaking for the things of God. I would not add to or take away from what's written in the Book.

Tradition Tradition Tradition

Let's base stuff on the Bible.

I can preach in pair of jeans and be just as anointed as I am in a suit. I don't preach in jeans because it is not my preference.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Caston Smith

Well, I do believe Paul mentioned in his discourse on standards in I Timothy chapter 2 something to the effect of platting of the hair, gold or pearls etc. women shouldn't wear anything in their hair like feathers, chop sticks, any type of gold ornament, etc.

When you made mentions of robes I immediately thought of clerical robes etc. Not bath robes or anything of that nature ... Honestly I don't reckon I even own a rain coat. Or any type of long over coat.

Paul didn't say feathers, chop sticks or chop suey...do the women wear their hair up ever at your church? If so, how?

Back to the verse in Isaiah...purses now are a sin? Coats? Robes? lol...where does it end?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Caston Smith

It's evident that Apostolics are very "hard" on woman when it comes to standards and seem to leave out the men so to speak ...


I think men should refrain from wearing patten-leather shoes, colored socks, any kind of large square toed "Italian" look shoes, about the only acceptions is plain black wing-tips or a Florshiem shoe that is not flashy. They should wear their hair combed neatly. No hair touching their collar. No tight pants or jeans. No kind of muscle shirt. Should only wear white dress shirts to the House of God. Things of these sort ...

HAHAHAHAH

Colored socks? So they have to be transparent? Square toes HAHAHAHAHA
No Jeans. Not one hair touching the collar..HAHAHAH. Can only wear a WHITE dress shirt to church. HAHAHAHAH...Seriously Caston...you ARE pulling our legs right?

What would you do with out all these unbiblical rules? Do you guys have like a written list everyone can carry around in their pocket....a sort of "Bible companion" so not only can they read the word of God, they can read these other dress codes (in case they forget) and meditate on them day and night

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Caston Smith

II Thessalonians 2:15
Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

This refers to the traditions that the Apostles themselves taught during the 1st Century. They commanded no one anywhere to shave their faces smooth like a woman's as a condition of fellowship.

Originally Posted by Caston Smith

There's nothing wrong with traditions as long as they aren't sinful in nature.

The problem arises when traditions are introduced that actually run counter to the teachings of the NT or when they cause division within the body of Christ.

When I first came into the Apostolic movement as a teenager back in the late 1970's the thing that used be preached a lot was "give up the traditions of men..." Now that has changed. Used to be a lot of preaching against the whole idea of "traditions" in general. Now what we hear, even from some of the same voices, is that "traditions are okay..." What changed?

Originally Posted by Caston Smith

I believe we have picked up a lot of good things from different ones in church history.

And here you display wisdom, in my opinion. But we must remember that those things that we pick up are not to replace the Gospel message itself and should not be used to cause division within the body.

Originally Posted by Caston Smith

John Wesley for instance ... he preached the message of Holiness and sanctification.

John Calvin-justification by faith. All though I do not adhere to the "alone" part of his teaching, because I believe if one has genuine faith it will produce works (i.e. repentance, water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins etc)

So as you can see there's nothing wrong with holding traditions that are not sinful in nature ...

"Holiness and sanctification" and even Calvin's "justification" are not traditions, but rather are Biblical principles. We were talking about white shirts and unwaxed shoe laces.

But do we add to your list the Roman Catholic Church's teachings about the ministry shaving their faces smooth as a sign of submission to the Pope?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Caston Smith

The Florshiem above is the one I wear and a good modest conservative looking shoe not too flashy, and not too dull ...

Here are other acceptions of men's dress shoes.

I don't know Caston...the toe on that first shoe doesn't seem round enough...are you sure that's not a liberal show? I'd hate think all this time you were really liberal and didn't know it