Isaiah 3 and jewelry...

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

Yeah, it says "not with gold" so no need to bother with context. Pesky little details those things.

The "context" was not the showy...which gold is!! Good grief, you guys are a trip.


I've never argued that Paul suggested people going naked, nor has Blume from what I read, but rather Paul is suggesting ...

Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as braided hair and the wearing of gold jewelry and fine clothes. 4Instead, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God's sight.

Notice what he suggests rather than gold and clothes.... notice it. Keep noticing it.

Yes, very good jeffrey, I am "noticing" it. It says not to wear gold, pearls, or costly array...do you "notice" it? Context compliments the words on the page, not nullifies them as you try to do...then wanna' talk to ME about "hermeneutics". Puhleeeeeeeeeezzzeee....

Like I said, you have NO business whatsoever claiming any knowledge of hermeneutics. It's gross how you treat the text. The PLAIN "meaning" of a Text is only as meaningful as its context. Way to rape Paul's words though.

I see, you can somehow erase the plain words "not the wearing of gold, pearls, or costly array." So, Jeffrey, are we now free to be decked out in ornaments, w/ &1000 suits on? No....then to what Scriptures will you appeal, since we apparently cannot take I Tim. 2 at face value??? Then wanna' chide me for a lack of "hermeneutics."???? Toooooo funny!

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

Please don't ever claim to have taken a hermeneutic class ever again. Thank you.

Back at ya'...since we apparently cannot even comprehend the grammatical term "N-O-T"! Thank you kind sir!

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by rdp

I see, you can somehow erase the plain words "not the wearing of gold, pearls, or costly array." So, Jeffrey, are we now free to be decked out in ornaments, w/ &1000 suits on? No....then to what Scriptures will you appeal, since we apparently cannot take I Tim. 2 at face value??? Then wanna' chide me for a lack of "hermeneutics."???? Toooooo funny!

I didn't erase the words, I exegeted the verse.

No, I think the NT is very clear on modesty. Paul points us to what he's talking about in the end of the verse -- her meek spirit. If you want to be beautiful, here's how. It's not a prohibition on anything, it's an exhortation toward a beautiful spirit.

You want to turn something beautiful like sanctification into a uniform. Not going to happen. Wasn't the NT apostle's intent, no matter how you try to read back into their words whatever you please.

I do, in fact, take these scriptures at face value That doesn't mean reading in to them whatever we please. If by "face value" you mean throwing out good sense, hermeneutics and exegesis, then maybe your probably with "defining things" goes well beyond the passages you are throwing out.

So let's run the cycle and now go back to the OT verses that "prove" jewelry is a sin. *chuckle*

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by rdp

Back at ya'...since we apparently cannot even comprehend the grammatical term "N-O-T"! Thank you kind sir!

You're hilarious.

I don't need a grammar instruction on the word "not," apparently you do. What is dependent on the word "not" in this verse? What does it mean? What's the significance of the word "not?" Also, do you ever ask that about a passage -- what is Paul saying?? What's he getting at? Is he trying to deliver a prohibition so legalists like yourself can hang other believers, or is he pointing to something else?

Going back to your prior comments --- your conversion. Are you telling me that you studied every standard of the church, plan of salvation, godhead... all of it before saying "i agree" and becoming part of the Pentecostal church? I find that hard to believe bub.

Fact is, I studied it and also found I was wrong. This came after my first year in Bible college. I didn't join another church and try to justify all their doctrines, or parrot what they said.

[Jeffrey]

Very conservative ESV:

1Likewise, wives,(A) be subject to your own husbands, so that(B) even if some do not obey the word,(C) they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives, 2when they see your(D) respectful and pure conduct. 3(E) Do not let your adorning be external—the braiding of hair and the putting on of gold jewelry, or the clothing you wear— 4but let your adorning be(F) the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God’s sight is very precious.

Can't get any more clear than this

Not material things (particular to what they were probably wearing and related to -- women had jewelry, did their hair and concerned themselves with clothing), but the "hidden person of the heart."

[Godsdrummer]

I just had a thought I would be interested in how many have been pursuaded by RDP that Jewelry is wrong by this thread and how many see that he is wrong.

I for one have had my views cemented even more from this thread. And that is on the side of you can wear Jewelry.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by rdp

[B][COLOR="DarkRed"]Perhaps you should take some courses in grammar Mike.

Why do you always make this subjective? Let's stick to objective discussion. We always read, "You... you need to... you are.. " Let's stay objective and deal with the issue and not one another. All of us, ookay?

The "them" grammatically modifies the "their" in beginning portion of the verse. "Thou shalt not desire the silver or gold on THEM..." was stated after He commanded them to destroy the idols! The gold & silver was on those not in circumcision covenant w/ him...just as the gold & silver is on those not water & Spirit baptized today. "Learn not the way of the heathen...".

It speaks about being snared by taking the jewelry from the idols. Israel had this problem. It does not simply say do not take jewelry lest you be ensnared. It says to not take the jewelry from the idols. Israel worshiped a brazen serpent.

(Deu 7:25) The graven images of their gods shall ye burn with fire: thou shalt not desire the silver or gold that is on them, nor take it unto thee, lest thou be snared therein: for it is an abomination to the LORD thy God.

Of course the jewels were on the idols and God did not want the people to take them to themselves. But the fact is that they were from idols. You seem to think the idol connection is moot and irrelevant. But God stipulated it is from idols. You do not read anything about God telling people to not take jewelry, period. It is distinctly from idols. You think that has no bearing? God never said Rebekkah had an abomination and went to see Isaac, but we do read it is abomination to take that which is from idols. The very next verse mentions this.

(Deu 7:26) Neither shalt thou bring an abomination into thine house, lest thou be a cursed thing like it: but thou shalt utterly detest it, and thou shalt utterly abhor it; for it is a cursed thing.

Look, Mike, I honestly don't have time to waste w/ this non-sense. Repent & obey the Word of God that it may be well w/ your soul....seriously......I'm not your enemy, but I do call false teaching when I see it.

You know it is not nonsense. Be civil. If you would spend more time actually looking at the issue than thinking of how to demean those who disagree with you, this could be a good chat.

Problem is Peter says no such thing, that is supplied by Mike's presuppositions...not the text.

No, it is the only sensible conclusion about the idea.

(1Pe 3:3) Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;
(1Pe 3:4) 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.

G2889
κόσμος
kosmos
kos'-mos
Probably from the base of G2865; orderly arrangement, that is, decoration; by implication the world (in a wide or narrow sense, including its inhabitants, literally or figuratively [morally]): - adorning, world.

They were told to not make their WORLDS, or infatuation, these things. He did not say do not wear them. He said do not make them your worlds. Kosmos. It follows Paul's general concept.

1Co 7:30-31 And they that weep, as though they wept not; and they that rejoice, as though they rejoiced not; and they that buy, as though they possessed not; (31) And they that use this world, as not abusing it: for the fashion of this world passeth away.

It is speaking of where their hearts are.

Men smarter than you and I see the manner in which Peter wrote and showed the true sense.

John Gill:

nor are we to suppose that the apostle forbids the use of what follows, but only when used in a luxurious and extravagant manner, and to feed pride and vanity, and encourage, lasciviousness and wantonness:

1Pe 3:3-4 Don't depend on things like fancy hairdos or gold jewelry or expensive clothes to make you look beautiful. (4) Be beautiful in your heart by being gentle and quiet. This kind of beauty will last, and God considers it very special.

PNow, I'm more than happy to interact w/ you guys on a scholastical level w/out all of the ad hominem's, but you seem to forget that this works both ways!

Bro., look at the first posts you made to us and realize how things start. Let's end it here and now, okay?

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

I didn't erase the words, I exegeted the verse.

My eyes bugged out of my head on this one! If you call this "exegesis," pls., pls., pl. do not ever talk to ME about "proper hermeneutics" again...seriously. You've not provided cases, tenses, word definitions, etc.....but you classify that as "exegesis"??????????

No, I think the NT is very clear on modesty. Paul points us to what he's talking about in the end of the verse -- her meek spirit. If you want to be beautiful, here's how. It's not a prohibition on anything,

Wow, "not a prohibition on ANYTHING," no wonder you wouldn't have a problem w/ me in tongue rings, nose rings, etc. Hmmm, I suppose this also means that Paul/Peter would've condoned short pants on mem & women in the church eh' Jeffrey!?!? Who takes you seriously other than those just as far off?!

it's an exhortation toward a beautiful spirit.

Agreed & the contrast was between the external & internal. The external had a "not" connected to it, while the internal had a "but this" tied to it. You're getting closer Jeffrey!

You want to turn something beautiful like sanctification into a uniform. Not going to happen. Wasn't the NT apostle's intent, no matter how you try to read back into their words whatever you please.

Then erase the expression "not with gold, pearls, or costly array." YOU fella's are the ones w/ your eraser out; I simply let the text speak for itself.

I do, in fact, take these scriptures at face value That doesn't mean reading in to them whatever we please.

Then quit saying that "it wasn't a prohibition on ANYTHING," since actual text says nothing of the sort. So, Jeffrey, who's supplying & importing the words? Need some help? Jeffrey & Mike, that's who!
If by "face value" you mean throwing out good sense, hermeneutics and exegesis, then maybe your probably with "defining things" goes well beyond the passages you are throwing out.

So let's run the cycle and now go back to the OT verses that "prove" jewelry is a sin. *chuckle*

Happy to oblige kind sir: Ex. 33, Gen. 35, Deut. 7, Is. 3, Hosea 2, Jer. 4, Ezek. 23. Glad you asked!

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

You're hilarious.

I don't need a grammar instruction on the word "not," apparently you do. What is dependent on the word "not" in this verse? What does it mean? What's the significance of the word "not?" Also, do you ever ask that about a passage -- what is Paul saying?? What's he getting at? Is he trying to deliver a prohibition so legalists like yourself can hang other believers, or is he pointing to something else?

So, when I come at you strong, I have a "bad spirit," but you can call me names such as "Legalist/Pharisee." So, again, I state that I would rather be "legal" than "illegal," One label is just as good as the next! What now, back to the text!

Going back to your prior comments --- your conversion. Are you telling me that you studied every standard of the church, plan of salvation, godhead... all of it before saying "i agree" and becoming part of the Pentecostal church? I find that hard to believe bub.

Belive what you will "bub," makes absolutely NO difference to me. I was in a trinitarian church & the Lord put several people around me in the truth to work on me. They had answers & I didn't. They had Bible & I didn't. In sum, I had to have an honest heart w/ the Bible if I wanted to be saved...so do you!

Fact is, I studied it and also found I was wrong. This came after my first year in Bible college. I didn't join another church and try to justify all their doctrines, or parrot what they said.

I have repeatedly stated that I don't believe everything that pentecostal people do [that should be apparent from the women preacher issue], but the majority of it, I find right in the Bible.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

Very conservative ESV:

1Likewise, wives,(A) be subject to your own husbands, so that(B) even if some do not obey the word,(C) they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives, 2when they see your(D) respectful and pure conduct. 3(E) Do not let your adorning be external—the braiding of hair and the putting on of gold jewelry, or the clothing you wear— 4but let your adorning be(F) the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God’s sight is very precious.

Can't get any more clear than this

Very good Jeffrey...did you see where it "clearly" says "Do N-O-T let your adorning be external...putting on of GOLD JEWELRY..." Dude, can not read??? Astounding how you can quote it & then deny it!

Not material things (particular to what they were probably wearing and related to -- women had jewelry, did their hair and concerned themselves with clothing), but the "hidden person of the heart."

Precisely Watson! "N-O-T material things...", like jewelry! Good grief...this is crazy & a total waste of my time. Repent & believe what you quote Jeffrey!