Here's where I'm at:
I think that everyone can agree on the fact the first churches (epistles) without doubt laid down a number of dress codes. Now with that knowledge, do we:
1 - Try to decipher these dress codes and apply them today?
2 - Try to understand the thought process used in creating these dress codes and apply this process to a 21st Century application?
I think the UPCI has done a little bit of both which has yielded some uncanny results (no beards, open-toed shoes, etc.)
But what I don't know that I can live with is the idea that dress standards are to only be a personal conviction. That is just not supported in the Bible and I would venture to say that even the most open-minded member on here would have some issues if their respective platform staff showed up Sun. morning with purple hair, tattoo's, tongue piercing etc. And as result feel that something should be done or said. ...be honest!
Bottom line is:
I think everyone, (Apostolic's, Baptist's, Catholic's etc.) has a line that they feel should be drawn. I don't see eye-to-eye with every issue, but instead of just tearing down we have to acknowledge that all of us have some sort of personal standard and begin to consider how we can ever reconcile the differences? I know, I know, standards should not be crammed down throats, and taken out of context! I AGREE MORE THAN YOU KNOW! But having no standards is just unrealistic - every religion, workplace, and business does.
Propose a change! Don't just complain about the obvious. But that's a bigger task than what any of us imagine. In this light, I can't throw that many stones at the UPCI
Sorry... didn't realize you responded to me, the thread got busy and so did I.
That is just it, the epistles really didn't hand down any dress codes other than modesty. Most folks wore open toed shoes (sandals) and in Jewish culture only two kinds of men were clean shaven... sodomites and Romans.
Modesty is the standard when it comes to clothing. And with correctly applied biblical principles+Holy Ghost convictions, no-one will have purple hair, piercings or lay on the beach in a speedo or bikini.
I really have no problem with standards applied personally as an outward manifestation of and inward commitment to Jesus. Since we seem to be new to each other and for the benefit of those who do not know me or know me well I fall on the conservative side of the fence and am what this forum's member would call a three stepper. In fact I am probably a bit more on the conservative side than many mainstream UPCI churches.
I agree that having no standards is unrealistic. Everyone has a line, it may be drawn at different places but the line is there.
My only problems with them fall into three areas.
When they are inconsistently taught using inapplicable scriptures or misinterpreted scripture. i.e.
(3) Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;
(4) But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.
This scripture is incorrectly used as a prohibition against wearing any jewelry. Yet where is the standard which could also be extracted from this on plaiting of hair and apparel? The last UPCI General COnference I went to had all kinds of hairdos and outlandish dresses, but no jewelry of course!
Instead the principle of the verses is simple, don't let the outward be your adorning. So correctly applied biblical principle would dictate that if I wear jewelry (i don't BTW) it won't be the extravagant sort that draw attention to itself and the same would apply to my hair and clothes.
When they are used as a guideline to judge and discard people, whether they be sinner or saint. Despite the old Apostolic title "Fruit Inspector" which I always heard used in conjunction with judging someone's outward appearance, God never commissioned such an office.
When we put someone in hell because they got hair on their face or own a television, I think we stand in danger of the judgment over it, because that is precisely what the Pharisees did and we know how Jesus responded to that... he hasn't changed his mind on that.
When preacher arbitrarily make rules up and demand obedience to their personal likes or dislikes because they are "the man of God" and threatens people with hell if they don't line up.
So there that is, pretty much my view of all that. Jesus' didn't come to make a new religion. And when we place an over emphasis on out ward things and mandate them, that is what we are doing, turning the liberty he called us to into another religion.
The UPCI started on a good course, one steppers and three steppers commited to work together to further the gospel, outward wasn't much of an issue... but somewhere along the way it turned into just another religious denomination.
__________________
Last edited by John Atkinson; 01-21-2010 at 10:42 AM.
Your right, trust me - I agree with your sentiment!
But then again, here we go pointing fingers and tearing down. How do you feel we should handle these scriptures??
I just some people to go on record. Again:
Do we apply them today?
Disregard their application for today?
Try to understand their purpose and alter for 21st century application?
Your right, trust me - I agree with your sentiment!
But then again, here we go pointing fingers and tearing down. How do you feel we should handle these scriptures??
I just some people to go on record. Again:
Do we apply them today?
Disregard their application for today?
Try to understand their purpose and alter for 21st century application?
See JA's post above - - that I'm 100% in agreement with!
__________________
Master of Science in Applied Disgruntled Religious Theorist Wrangling
PhD in Petulant Tantrum Quelling
Dean of the School of Hard Knocks
Sorry... didn't realize you responded to me, the thread got busy and so did I.
That is just it, the epistles really didn't hand down any dress codes other than modesty. Most folks wore open toed shoes (sandals) and in Jewish culture only two kinds of men were clean shaven... sodomites and Romans.
Modesty is the standard when it comes to clothing. And with correctly applied biblical principles+Holy Ghost convictions, no-one will have purple hair, piercings or lay on the beach in a speedo or bikini.
I really have no problem with standards applied personally as an outward manifestation of and inward commitment to Jesus. Since we seem to be new to each other and for the benefit of those who do not know me or know me well I fall on the conservative side of the fence and am what this forum's member would call a three stepper. In fact I am probably a bit more on the conservative side than many mainstream UPCI churches.
I agree that having no standards is unrealistic. Everyone has a line, it may be drawn at different places but the line is there.
My only problems with them fall into three areas.
.... The UPCI started on a good course, one steppers and three steppers commited to work together to further the gospel, outward wasn't much of an issue... but somewhere along the way it turned into just another religious denomination.
Thanks for the reply! Seems like you and I are probably pretty close to each other on this issue.
Personally I don't have a problem with dress standards at all, actually, I think they can play a vital role in one's life and for an organization. BUT your right, somewhere down the line it got way out of control. Trust me! I've seen the abuse first hand. But like I've inferred every organization, workplace, business etc. has a dress code and I am proud that the UPCI holds a higher standard than others but I am not proud of how we've have handle, implemented, and judged others in regards to our dress code.
Unfortunately, it seems to me that the majority of people are stacked up two extreme different sides and BOTH sides continue to hurl stones at each other.
Sorry... didn't realize you responded to me, the thread got busy and so did I.
That is just it, the epistles really didn't hand down any dress codes other than modesty. Most folks wore open toed shoes (sandals) and in Jewish culture only two kinds of men were clean shaven... sodomites and Romans.
Modesty is the standard when it comes to clothing. And with correctly applied biblical principles+Holy Ghost convictions, no-one will have purple hair, piercings or lay on the beach in a speedo or bikini.
I really have no problem with standards applied personally as an outward manifestation of and inward commitment to Jesus. Since we seem to be new to each other and for the benefit of those who do not know me or know me well I fall on the conservative side of the fence and am what this forum's member would call a three stepper. In fact I am probably a bit more on the conservative side than many mainstream UPCI churches.
I agree that having no standards is unrealistic. Everyone has a line, it may be drawn at different places but the line is there.
My only problems with them fall into three areas.
When they are inconsistently taught using inapplicable scriptures or misinterpreted scripture. i.e.
This scripture is incorrectly used as a prohibition against wearing any jewelry. Yet where is the standard which could also be extracted from this on plaiting of hair and apparel? The last UPCI General COnference I went to had all kinds of hairdos and outlandish dresses, but no jewelry of course!
Instead the principle of the verses is simple, don't let the outward be your adorning. So correctly applied biblical principle would dictate that if I wear jewelry (i don't BTW) it won't be the extravagant sort that draw attention to itself and the same would apply to my hair and clothes.
When they are used as a guideline to judge and discard people, whether they be sinner or saint. Despite the old Apostolic title "Fruit Inspector" which I always heard used in conjunction with judging someone's outward appearance, God never commissioned such an office.
When we put someone in hell because they got hair on their face or own a television, I think we stand in danger of the judgment over it, because that is precisely what the Pharisees did and we know how Jesus responded to that... he hasn't changed his mind on that.
When preacher arbitrarily make rules up and demand obedience to their personal likes or dislikes because they are "the man of God" and threatens people with hell if they don't line up.
So there that is, pretty much my view of all that. Jesus' didn't come to make a new religion. And when we place an over emphasis on out ward things and mandate them, that is what we are doing, turning the liberty he called us to into another religion.
The UPCI started on a good course, one steppers and three steppers commited to work together to further the gospel, outward wasn't much of an issue... but somewhere along the way it turned into just another religious denomination.
POTD
PO - - no one is critizing you for following what God is directing you to do. No one is "tearing down UPC" when they state what has been stated above. Questioning how they got to where they were to where they are maybe, but not tearing them down.
Thanks John for taking the time to make this post.
__________________
Master of Science in Applied Disgruntled Religious Theorist Wrangling
PhD in Petulant Tantrum Quelling
Dean of the School of Hard Knocks
Sherri's church, Grace Church ... among "Charismatic" churches that speak against social drinking ....
While Elder Epley thinks wine at communion is fine ... There was a time that biblically .... this breaking of bread and wine was a "social" fellowship event.
Those who find excuses will find excuses for going to any church ... and those seeking to prop up their church or org will often resort to fingerpointing as well.
I don't think Sherri's church frowns at using wine for communion, just because they don't encourage social drinking.
Darcie, JC and my mom ... members at LTC are not accustomed to drinking alcohol socially or at communion ... so it is not a problem or an issue ... I'm sure they value the consistency.
Linear Mode
