Wedding Rings

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by NobodyImportant

I see a lot of comments going against Bro Whole Hearted. Let me interject that it is okay to assault one's position, but throwing out mean spirited comments in ungodly and should not be done. This does apply both ways and is said with all respect, especially to Bro WH who is also my elder in Christ and a personal friend.

To you who would attack his position, why not try a different direction and ASK him why he feels like he does? You may be surprised at his answer. You may not agree with it, but throwing out negative comments is the same as biting and devouring one another which the Bible is implicit in its condemnation concerning the behaviour.
NI

You don't have to defend WH, he is highly developed in defending himself. He is a lightening rod because he dogmatically posts his position as heaven or lost.

Modesty!

Modesty in adornment, whether it be in jewelry or in clothing is the intent of the scriptures and the mind of God. Excess with the intent to draw attention to SELF is ungodliness whether it be immodest in the adornment of jewelry or an outlandish Victorian look in the name of holiness. Attempts at exalting flesh take on insidious forms. It goes on in the world and in the church alike. Wise is the Pastor that can recognize the difference without condemning one while applauding the other.

[Trouvere]

Originally Posted by BrotherEastman

Question for preachers; Why do you allow or disallow members of your congregation to wear wedding rings?

I am a preacher Brother Eastman as is my husband though we are not pastoring at the present time.Years ago when I got into church I was engaged to be married and did a study on wedding rings as some pastors
teach against them and some are for them.
I am going to direct this dialogue to you only and refrain from any arguments.
First of all I prayed about it.I did have a very nice antique set at my disposal as my fiance's adopted mother had died and he wanted to use those if we did use rings.He loved her dearly and she him.They were elderly when he was adopted so the rings were very valuable in market value and sentiment.

Here are reasons I decided against it.
1.The very first time a ring is mentioned in the bible its given by Pharoh to Joseph.It was a ring of authority.Pharoh was not a Jew but a pagan.Thus the ring did not have Godly sentiments.
2.Wedding rings are said to be round as the marriage and union is said to be eternal.This is untrue because truthfully the marriage vows end at death
or in our day at divorce which make it shamefully sad so I think.
3.The wearing of gold has always been associated with divinity.

I will post more later.I have a life and its sunny Saturday in Florida.

Originally Posted by Trouvere

Here are reasons I decided against it.
1.The very first time a ring is mentioned in the bible its given by Pharoh to Joseph.It was a ring of authority.Pharoh was not a Jew but a pagan.Thus the ring did not have Godly sentiments.

Gen 41:42 And Pharaoh took off his ring from his hand, and put it upon Joseph's hand, and arrayed him in vestures of fine linen, and put a gold chain about his neck;

Do you suppose committing adultery has the sentiments of God? Of course you don't. Yet, Joseph was very God conscience. When a lustful woman tried to entice him to her bed, though she held on to him in her burning desperation, he fled leaving his cloak behind. He refused under strong convictions that committing adultery, though he was entirely a man with manly desires, deferring to the mind of God in that matter.

Now, here you are saying that Joseph had no such inward discretion, having no conscience of God in this matter. I find that thought staggering. Here he accepted what some here would consider almost, if not total blasphemy by accepting on his finger what he refused in a woman's bedroom.

Do you really think that Joseph would please God in one instance and displease God in the next?

Truthfully, Joseph pleased God in both instances. He pleased God in fleeing the insistence of a lust driven woman and he also pleased God by accepting Pharoah's ring upon his finger.

[Trouvere]

Originally Posted by Brother Strange

Gen 41:42 And Pharaoh took off his ring from his hand, and put it upon Joseph's hand, and arrayed him in vestures of fine linen, and put a gold chain about his neck;

Do you suppose committing adultery has the sentiments of God? Of course you don't. Yet, Joseph was very God conscience. When a lustful woman tried to entice him to her bed, though she held on to him in her burning desperation, he fled leaving his cloak behind. He refused under strong convictions that committing adultery, though he was entirely a man with manly desires, deferring to the mind of God in that matter.

Now, here you are saying that Joseph had no such inward discretion, having no conscience of God in this matter. I find that thought staggering. Here he accepted what some here would consider almost, if not total blasphemy by accepting on his finger what he refused in a woman's bedroom.

Do you really think that Joseph would please God in one instance and displease God in the next?

Truthfully, Joseph pleased God in both instances. He pleased God in fleeing the insistence of a lust driven woman and he also pleased God by accepting Pharoah's ring upon his finger.

Brother Strange I will continue to post more of the reasons I personally don't wear a ring.Please weigh your words to me.Its more than one reason.I would not want to be accused of causing anyone to lose conviction based on my lace of conviction in any area.

[Trouvere]

Originally Posted by Trouvere

Brother Strange I will continue to post more of the reasons I personally don't wear a ring.Please weigh your words to me.Its more than one reason.I would not want to be accused of causing anyone to lose conviction based on my lace of conviction in any area.

Honestly I do think Joseph would displease God.He did not have the precious gift of the Holy Ghost.

Originally Posted by Trouvere

Honestly I do think Joseph would displease God.He did not have the precious gift of the Holy Ghost.

Very interesting statement, above.

Sister, you know that I will carefully weigh my words with you as you know that I regard you as a very precious sister in the Lord. I highly honor and regard you as such.

[Trouvere]

Originally Posted by Brother Strange

Very interesting statement, above.

Sister, you know that I will carefully weigh my words with you as you know that I regard you as a very precious sister in the Lord. I highly honor and regard you as such.

I am on my way out today as we have our son in before his Japan departure.
What I meant by the statement about Joseph is that Joseph did not have what we have.We have more to be accountable for than anyone pre Calvary ever did.

[Rhoni]

Originally Posted by Brother Strange

Modesty!

Modesty in adornment, whether it be in jewelry or in clothing is the intent of the scriptures and the mind of God. Excess with the intent to draw attention to SELF is ungodliness whether it be immodest in the adornment of jewelry or an outlandish Victorian look in the name of holiness. Attempts at exalting flesh take on insidious forms. It goes on in the world and in the church alike. Wise is the Pastor that can recognize the difference without condemning one while applauding the other.

Amen!

Words of Wisdom that should be written in a book!

Blessings, Rhoni

[BrotherEastman]

Originally Posted by Trouvere

I am a preacher Brother Eastman as is my husband though we are not pastoring at the present time.Years ago when I got into church I was engaged to be married and did a study on wedding rings as some pastors
teach against them and some are for them.
I am going to direct this dialogue to you only and refrain from any arguments.
First of all I prayed about it.I did have a very nice antique set at my disposal as my fiance's adopted mother had died and he wanted to use those if we did use rings.He loved her dearly and she him.They were elderly when he was adopted so the rings were very valuable in market value and sentiment.

Here are reasons I decided against it.
1.The very first time a ring is mentioned in the bible its given by Pharoh to Joseph.It was a ring of authority.Pharoh was not a Jew but a pagan.Thus the ring did not have Godly sentiments.
2.Wedding rings are said to be round as the marriage and union is said to be eternal.This is untrue because truthfully the marriage vows end at death
or in our day at divorce which make it shamefully sad so I think.
3.The wearing of gold has always been associated with divinity.

I will post more later.I have a life and its sunny Saturday in Florida.

Finally, someone with a mind to give an answer through the smoke screen of judgement. Everyone here has given a pretty good argument, I should've expected that since it had something to do with standards. The reason I started this thread was because there are some preachers who are conservative and actually wears wedding rings that are associated with fornicators and adulterers by the "more" conservative group of preachers. I wonder about "motives" sometimes, and I wonder why a more conservative preacher would condemn another man of God who is leading people to repent and recieve God just like the more conservative man of God. I do not want to sound like I'm picking on someone, but it has been stated on here that he would not care about being unified with a man of God that is preaching the same thing he is. This to me is truly disturbing, as sowing discord is something that God will judge as well as any other sin. Sowing discord is also being UNHOLY. I await more of what you have to say, thanks.