UPCI's Randy Hollis Throws Down the Gauntlet: The Emancipation of Isaac

[staysharp]

How is one convicted if not by their conscience? Or why did God give us a conscience if not to be able to tell right from wrong. Rom 2:15 - AA Allen

He's one to really talk! He couldn't even obey his own conscience.

[SDG]

I consider the 'holiness standards' of the UPC manmade rules. But having said that it is possible for a woman to be personally convicted by the Holy Spirit that wearing jewelry is wrong. For instance, if I adorned myself with excessive jewelry or took pride in my jewelry, a pride which comes with a feeling of superiority, then it would be sin and God would convict me of the pride that came with wearing jewelry. After repentance, I would either get rid of my jewelry since it was a hinderance in my walk with God or I would be able to push away thoughts of pride and still wear jewelry but not to the same excess. It's not all black and white as you would like it to be. But the important thing to remember is not to impose my convictions on others. (And if you're curious, no, the above did not happen to me. I've have never been one to wear jewelry even before I became a Christian. This is only an example.)

Your example is fallacious .... the problem you've describe is a failure to live according to the biblical principle of modesty ... the jewelry is not the sin. Hence, one can say jewelry is not a sin but immodesty is.

The Holy Ghost who has inspired the Word has never declared jewelry a sin throughout scripture ... but pride in wearing it.

If you feel in you can't control your pride ... and jewelry is a temptation ... then hey don't wear it ... but wearing jewelry is NOT THE SIN.

It's like the old adage GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE ... PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE.

Being allowed to bear arms is legal ... MURDER ISN'T

Eating certain meats can be unhealthy ... but consuming the meat is not a sin ...

Wearing pants or a skirt is not a sin .... it's being immodest that will get you in trouble.

God's Spirit doesn't contradict His Word. It gives testimony of His Word.

Lastly, you're defending a system that equates personal convictions to the fruit of the Spirit.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Your example is fallacious .... the problem you've describe is a failure to live according to the biblical principle of modesty ... the jewelry is not the sin. Hence, one can say jewelry is not a sin but immodesty is.

The Holy Ghost who has inspired the Word has never declared jewelry a sin throughout scripture ... but pride in wearing it.

If you feel in you can't control your pride ... and jewelry is a temptation ... then hey don't wear it ... but wearing jewelry is NOT THE SIN.

Dan, maybe I didn't express myself clearly but I agree with you. Wearing jewelry is not a sin but pride is and if you can't wear jewelry without feeling proudful, then don't wear it. Some folks would call it a conviction.

It's like the old adage GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE ... PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE.

Being allowed to bear arms is legal ... MURDER ISN'T

Eating certain meats can be unhealthy ... but consuming the meat is not a sin ...

Wearing pants or a skirt is not a sin .... it's being immodest that will get you in trouble.

Dan, did Paul condemn the man that didn't eat meat? But what if the man that believed it was wrong to eat meat went ahead and ate the meat would that be sin to him? Rom 14. Make it black and white all you want, but there are grey areas.

God's Spirit doesn't contradict His Word. It gives testimony of His Word.

Lastly, you're defending a system that equates personal convictions to the fruit of the Spirit.

What do you mean by equating personal convictions to the fruit of the Spirit?

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by staysharp

He's one to really talk! He couldn't even obey his own conscience.

I don't know what you're talking about but maybe you should cut the guy some slack unless of course you are perfect.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

Dan, maybe I didn't express myself clearly but I agree with you. Wearing jewelry is not a sin but pride is and if you can't wear jewelry without feeling proudful, then don't wear it. Some folks would call it a conviction.

Dan, did Paul condemn the man that didn't eat meat? But what if the man that believed it was wrong to eat meat went ahead and ate the meat would that be sin to him? Rom 14. Make it black and white all you want, but there are grey areas.

What do you mean by equating personal convictions to the fruit of the Spirit?

You're confusing the words temptation w/ sin ... Mizpeh ... God's Word declares what's sin ... sin is sin. A temptation can be something that is clean but will make you do what is unclean. The object in and of itself is not a sin ....


it's what we've been arguing about for the last few pages ... Can one declare that wearing pants is not a sin ... NO, IT'S NOT .... succumbing to a temptation that leads to breaking one of God's clearly defined laws ... is.

His Spirit gives testimony of that ...

If we're going to go around waiting on everyone's conscience to declare what is sin and not sin in their lives ... OH BOY.

The standards crowd ... cons and mods may differ on how to preach standards ... but in the end if you're not obeying the clothesline holiness standards ... one is not walking right w/ God ... or truly Spirit filled and led.

In their minds those convictions are universally instilled by the Spirit ... no good Christian woman will wear pants if she's got the HG ... or at the very least she should outgrow them.

I have no problem w/ people living according to convictions ... but when those convictions are preached and taught as canon or living right ... then laters.


As for your question about meat ... I think God has made some declarations in HIS WORD....

14"Surely not, Lord!" Peter replied. "I have never eaten anything impure or unclean."
15The voice spoke to him a second time, "Do not call anything impure that God has made clean."

I honestly believe if we spoke to Paul or Peter on the matter of meat they would not give is the Holy Ghost will be your guide spiel. They would be definitive in their answers ...

As to whether is or not a sin was definitively defined by the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15.

[SDG]

Mizzy,

I've got to wonder if you are arguing w/ me, Mizpeh, because we haven't had any good doctrinal scraps in awhile ... being that socially you are a pants wearing liberal.

Are you missing a good old fashion rumble ... I could oblige, you know.

[staysharp]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

I don't know what you're talking about but maybe you should cut the guy some slack unless of course you are perfect.

I assumed you knew AA Allen since you quoted him. Do you not know of him?

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Mizzy,

I've got to wonder if you are arguing w/ me, Mizpeh, because we haven't had any good doctrinal scraps in awhile ... being that socially you are a pants wearing liberal.

Are you missing a good old fashion rumble ... I could oblige, you know.

I was thinking the same thing when you argued with PJ last night on this thread! I don't even like discussing holiness standards. I ignored alot of the threads PP and others started awhile back on standards. I'm dropping out of this discussion too.

I haven't been interested in doctrinal scraps for awhile but there is one that Adino is brewing on another thread I will get involved with later today.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by staysharp

I assumed you knew AA Allen since you quoted him. Do you not know of him?

All I know of him is what I read in his book recently on-line that Sam gave a link to "The Price of God's Miracle Working Power". That's what I quoted from. I thought the book was excellent. I have no clue as to his personal life or his public life except for what was posted in that thread.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

You're confusing the words temptation w/ sin ... Mizpeh ... God's Word declares what's sin ... sin is sin. A temptation can be something that is clean but will make you do what is unclean. The object in and of itself is not a sin ....


it's what we've been arguing about for the last few pages ... Can one declare that wearing pants is not a sin ... NO, IT'S NOT .... succumbing to a temptation that leads to breaking one of God's clearly defined laws ... is.

His Spirit gives testimony of that ...

If we're going to go around waiting on everyone's conscience to declare what is sin and not sin in their lives ... OH BOY.

The standards crowd ... cons and mods may differ on how to preach standards ... but in the end if you're not obeying the clothesline holiness standards ... one is not walking right w/ God ... or truly Spirit filled and led.

In their minds those convictions are universally instilled by the Spirit ... no good Christian woman will wear pants if she's got the HG ... or at the very least she should outgrow them.

I know what conservatives teach. I went to a conservative UPC church for 4 years and I obeyed them that had the rule over me as unto the Lord.

As for your question about meat ... I think God has made some declarations in HIS WORD....

14"Surely not, Lord!" Peter replied. "I have never eaten anything impure or unclean."
15The voice spoke to him a second time, "Do not call anything impure that God has made clean."

I honestly believe if we spoke to Paul or Peter on the matter of meat they would not give is the Holy Ghost will be your guide spiel. They would be definitive in their answers ...

As to whether is or not a sin was definitively defined by the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15.

Dan, what was Paul's answer to them that believed they couldn't eat meat? He didn't condemn them nor did he tell them that they had to eat meat. He explained what He believed from the Lord. But then, interestingly he said he would eat no meat so as not to offend his weaker brother. Paul didn't shove his liberty (to eat meat) in the other's face. There is an attitude of the heart that is important here. I believe Romans 14 can be applied to holiness standards.

Here's another example: Say a newly born again brother works out, stays in good physical shape and is very muscular. He usually wears short sleeved or no sleeved shirts but has noticed women commenting on his physique. He feels like he is distracting to women, maybe even a to the point of temptation to women and feels that he should wear long sleeves so as not to be a hinderance to the sisters in the church. Maybe he even feels the Spirit of the Lord in leading him to wear long sleeves. Now an older saint who is not as well built wears short sleeves and in no way feels like he is attracting undue attention to himself and continues to wear short sleeves shirts. Maybe things are not as cut and dry as you want them to be. But neither brother should enforce their view on the other.

Dan, read Romans 14 carefully.


1 Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations.
2 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.
3 Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him.
4 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.
5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.
6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks


10 But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.
11 For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.
12 So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.
13 Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way.
14 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.
15 But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died.
16 Let not then your good be evil spoken of:


19 Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another.
20 For meat destroy not the work of God. All things indeed are pure; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offence.
21 It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.
22 Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth.
23 And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.

Dan, we need to support our weaker brothers.