No new converts noticed at the AMC Confernce

[GraceAmazing]

Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace*

Well, God created jewels if you want to get technical.

I think that if you really want to be literal, Paul condemned elaborate hairstyles in the very scriptures that people like to use against jewelry. Broided hair was specifically talking about elaborate hairstyles.

Yes, an elaborate hairstyle is an adornment. If you add feathers and doodads, even more so.

If God's creation (hair) is beautiful naturally, why not just wear it hanging down your back the way God created it? God didn't create it in twists and curls all over your head. God didn't create bobby-pins.

Now, to be clear, I don't think adornment or jewelry is a sin, so I'm not condemning the hairstyles. But I absolutely see it as a contradiction. I am firm and unswaying on that opinion.

This is a good, well-balanced post!

Sometimes we can be so close to the forest that we can't see the trees right in front of us...

I think we must be balanced in ALL things...JMHO

[commonsense]

Originally Posted by GraceAmazing

This is a good, well-balanced post!

Sometimes we can be so close to the forest that we can't see the trees right in front of us...

I think we must be balanced in ALL things...JMHO

Amen. Balance__________or should I say "commonsense".

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace*

Well, God created jewels if you want to get technical.

I think that if you really want to be literal, Paul condemned elaborate hairstyles in the very scriptures that people like to use against jewelry. Broided hair was specifically talking about elaborate hairstyles.

Yes, an elaborate hairstyle is an adornment. If you add feathers and doodads, even more so.

If God's creation (hair) is beautiful naturally, why not just wear it hanging down your back the way God created it? God didn't create it in twists and curls all over your head. God didn't create bobby-pins.

Now, to be clear, I don't think adornment or jewelry is a sin, so I'm not condemning the hairstyles. But I absolutely see it as a contradiction. I am firm and unswaying on that opinion.

It's only a contradiction, AQP, if the person in question believes that adornment is wrong. If they DON'T, and they're just obeying the rules that they have to in order to belong to a group (e.g., the UPCI, WPF, etc), then you'll still see them adorning themselves--just not with jewelry, since that's specifically mentioned.

It illustrates the fact that living according to a principle gives different results than living according to a list of rules. If a woman likes adornment, and likes pretty, fancy things--she's going to find a way to wear them, and still obey the rules she's been given.

My pastor preached about convictions recently, and he stated that "Your conduct reveals your convictions." Very true. You don't have to ask people what their convictions are. If they're against adornment, they'll dress plainly. If they're not, they won't--whether they have on jewelry or not.

I have a difficult time being hard on a group of women whose husbands and pastors have given them a list of rules, and so they are doing their best to look beautiful within their boundaries and culture. It isn't always their personal inconsistency that's showing.

Since you don't believe that adornment is a sin, then I would assume you're not condemning anyone for adorning themselves. In order to then condemn people for inconsistency, you'd have to assume that they, individually, believe that adornment is wrong, but do it anyway in innocuous ways. I would propose that their convictions are revealed by their actions, and that they don't believe adornment is wrong at all. The apparent inconsistency isn't personal, but imposed by a third party.

Here's my deal: I go to a UPCI church, so there are certain things I have to comply with, like it or not. However, the rules I don't agree with--I just obey them to the letter. I don't try to apply some related principle, because I don't think there is one. I'm perfectly fine with finding loopholes--because I don't embrace a broad principle behind the rule. (Such as the one regarding jewelry--I, like many other women I know, own blouses or sweaters with jewelry sewn on .) When I go to conference or special events, I have to dress more conservatively than I do on a normal basis. That's my paradigm. However, I have a personal set of core convictions that I don't waver from, no matter where we are--and several of those are things that the UPC org. doesn't hold.

Sooooo...it would sting a bit for someone to think I was being inconsistent to wear a big flower in my hair as opposed to a tiara, because I have nothing against tiaras either. (Except that I don't think it would be very tasteful, but that's neither here nor there.) In order to apply the "inconsistent" label, you'd have to first assume that I'm opposed to tiaras.

[*AQuietPlace*]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

It's only a contradiction, AQP, if the person in question believes that adornment is wrong. If they DON'T, and they're just obeying the rules that they have to in order to belong to a group (e.g., the UPCI, WPF, etc), then you'll still see them adorning themselves--just not with jewelry, since that's specifically mentioned.

I think it's a contradiction on the part of the preachers who are preaching against jewelry, makeup, etc.

I've heard preachers say - 'We don't wear jewelry because we don't believe in adorning ourselves'. And I'm sitting there thinking..... Looking around at the feathers and rhinestones and thinking.... we don't??

I wear a watch. And I've told numerous people - if I believed wearing jewelry was wrong, I wouldn't wear a watch, period. Because a watch is jewelry, any way you slice it. Since I personally don't believe jewelry is a sin, I wear a watch. I'm not contradictory, because I'm not violating my personal beliefs. But, *I'm* not telling anyone they're not allowed to wear a wedding ring!

I believe the preachers who are preaching against wedding rings, but wearing $200 watches are being contradictory.

It's not the people I'm accusing, it's the preaching. It's the standard. To preach that "adorning" is wrong, but be fine with elaborate hairstyles and clothing, is - in my opinion - a complete contradiction.

[allstate1]

Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace*

I think it's a contradiction on the part of the preachers who are preaching against jewelry, makeup, etc.

I've heard preachers say - 'We don't wear jewelry because we don't believe in adorning ourselves'. And I'm sitting there thinking.....

I wear a watch. And I've told numerous people - if I believed wearing jewelry was wrong, I wouldn't wear a watch, period. Because a watch is jewelry, any way you slice it. Since I personally don't believe jewelry is a sin, I wear a watch. I'm not contradictory, because I'm not violating my personal beliefs. But, I believe the preachers who are preaching against wedding rings, but wearing $200 watches are being contradictory.

It's not the people I'm accusing, it's the preaching. It's the standard. To preach that "adorning" is wrong, but be fine with elaborate hairstyles and clothing, is - in my opinion - a complete contradiction.

And these preachers always always say " I am just preaching the BIBLE"!!! I just find it funny what is labeled jewelry,adornment etc...depending on that preachers "likes"!!!

[*AQuietPlace*]

Very, very rarely in any of my posts am I referring to the people. I'm generally referring to the doctrines that are taught.

Most Pentecostal churches are filled with awesome, sincere, God-loving people. It's just many of the doctrines that cause me to scratch my head.

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace*

I think it's a contradiction on the part of the preachers who are preaching against jewelry, makeup, etc.

I've heard preachers say - 'We don't wear jewelry because we don't believe in adorning ourselves'. And I'm sitting there thinking..... Looking around at the feathers and rhinestones and thinking.... we don't??

I wear a watch. And I've told numerous people - if I believed wearing jewelry was wrong, I wouldn't wear a watch, period. Because a watch is jewelry, any way you slice it. Since I personally don't believe jewelry is a sin, I wear a watch. I'm not contradictory, because I'm not violating my personal beliefs. But, *I'm* not telling anyone they're not allowed to wear a wedding ring!

I believe the preachers who are preaching against wedding rings, but wearing $200 watches are being contradictory.

It's not the people I'm accusing, it's the preaching. It's the standard. To preach that "adorning" is wrong, but be fine with elaborate hairstyles and clothing, is - in my opinion - a complete contradiction.

Thank you for making that distinction. I completely agree. Those preachers will not allow glittery jewelry (or even plain jewelry, for that matter), but they have no problem with other types of elaborate adornment--as illustrated by what their wives and daughters wear (presumably with their approval).

[GraceAmazing]

My favorite contradiction? When my BIL gave my SIL a watch EMBEDDED with LOTS of diamonds, but then turned right around and preached against a wedding band....sorry for my confusion on THAT one!

Now, WHO was more gaudy and adorned?? LOL

I think most women in conservative circles stretch that rubber band boundary as far as they can take it because like it or not, the world has preached beauty...and what woman doesn't want to feel beautiful both inside and OUT?

[*AQuietPlace*]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

Thank you for making that distinction. I completely agree. Those preachers will not allow glittery jewelry (or even plain jewelry, for that matter), but they have no problem with other types of elaborate adornment--as illustrated by what their wives and daughters wear (presumably with their approval).

Exactly.

I was at the grocery store once and the cashier (a girl I saw there frequently) asked me why I didn't wear a wedding ring. I told her that my denomination didn't believe in wearing jewelry. I saw her glance at my watch, and then run her eyes over the rest of my outfit.

Yeah, I felt stupid. Yeah, I *know* it doesn't make sense.

[*AQuietPlace*]

Originally Posted by GraceAmazing

I think most women in conservative circles stretch that rubber band boundary as far as they can take it because like it or not, the world has preached beauty...and what woman doesn't want to feel beautiful both inside and OUT?

I don't think it's even that 'the world' has preached beauty... I think it's a God-given trait for a woman to want to look beautiful!