Apology

[AncientPaths]

Originally Posted by Jay

That is absolutely true. The interior of the cup must be as clean as the exterior.

The exterior. How is it clean? Basic rules of modesty? If that's what you mean, I totally agree. If you mean anything else, I think it's utter nonsense. A tool of the devil to keep people from exposure to the truth of actual Biblical teachings.

So tired of that foolishness.

[Jay]

I am going to be draw a bit of a line here, and I know tha many will not like it. The Bible commands modesty in our apparell and bans jewelry in the New Testament. That being said, modesty dictates that our private parts be covered safely beyond all revealing, women and men not wearing the apparel of the opposite gender, cover the breasts above, and the thigh below. Which means that by and large, sleeves should be around the elbows at the shortest, and all garments well below the knee (Wrists and ankles seem to be the safest places to mandate, but I am not the one who wrote the book.)

[houston]

Lol

[AncientPaths]

Originally Posted by Jay

I am going to be draw a bit of a line here, and I know tha many will not like it. The Bible commands modesty in our apparell and bans jewelry in the New Testament. That being said, modesty dictates that our private parts be covered safely beyond all revealing, women and men not wearing the apparel of the opposite gender, cover the breasts above, and the thigh below. Which means that by and large, sleeves should be around the elbows at the shortest, and all garments well below the knee (Wrists and ankles seem to be the safest places to mandate, but I am not the one who wrote the book.)

So, "by and large" is another way of saying "now let me add a bunch of stuff I made up." Got it.

[Jay]

You misunderstand why I said by and large. The reason is that those are the limits of modesty. The part that was from me was when I said ankles and wrists.

[AncientPaths]

Originally Posted by Jay

You misunderstand why I said by and large. The reason is that those are the limits of modesty. The part that was from me was when I said ankles and wrists.

I meant what I said. Those are not the limits of modesty. There are gazillions of short sleeves shirts that don't show women's breasts. And well below the knees is a stretch as well. This is how things get distorted into being labeled as "Biblical teaching." I'm not saying push the limits of modesty, but I am saying that you are doing serious editorializing with what you claim to be Biblical.

[Jay]

I have seen many sleeves above the elbow, and in almost every case the chest and armpit of the person can be easily seen. I am not condemning as I know many who do wear shorter sleeves, but it is still a fact. Garments that are above the knee will expose much of the thigh, and in many cases more. That is why it is why these are the lines endorsed, and if you look at church history, I am not by any means an exetremist at any other period of time.

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Melody

When someone has a great exceptional Apostolic Ministry and then they leave the truth as they proclaimed and loved it, it is with sadness that we, who listened and followed their ministry, watch them go a different path. A better path? No, there is more to holiness than dress it is a spirit. But to be delivered and then embrace or lead others down a backward path brings sadness to the hearts of saints and ministry.

So even though many may think someone is being judgmental, it is with a broken heart to watch those walk away. I apologize if I offended you.

You did not offend me in particular, but I think your comments could unnecessarily offend the pastor in question. I know he reads here at times and want him to know not all of us think he "left the truth". Not by any means.

While my family and I are conservative in practice, I do not believe dress standards as preached by UPC are acid test material. Furthermore, when I last heard the pastor in question preach, it was most apparent that he was still way more three stepper than I ever was - I honestly hope he sheds some of that, while continuing to baptize in Jesus Name and maintaining a Pentecostal distinctive.

We have family with the Global Ministries group, and I can only say they are nothing but godly people and genuine Christians. We may disagree with some secondary issues, but I truly believe they are very much "In Christ".

[RandyWayne]

Originally Posted by Hoovie

You did not offend me in particular, but I think your comments could unnecessarily offend the pastor in question. I know he reads here at times and want him to know not all of us think he "left the truth". Not by any means.

While my family and I are conservative in practice, I do not believe dress standards as preached by UPC are acid test material. Furthermore, when I last heard the pastor in question preach, it was most apparent that he was still way more three stepper than I ever was - I honestly hope he sheds some of that, while continuing to baptize in Jesus Name and maintaining a Pentecostal distinctive.

We have family with the Global Ministries group, and I can only say they are nothing but godly people and genuine Christians. We may disagree with some secondary issues, but I truly believe they are very much "In Christ".

[aegsm76]

I am probably one of the most conservative members of this forum. I am now in my 4th church that I have called home. All of these moves were due to job transfers. In moving to a new city I have always looked for a church that was vibrant, growing and had a discernable move of God happening. I have been very blessed in my home churches.
One of these churches was very moderate, one very conservative, one moderately conservative and one a little liberal, using the generally accepted definitions on this forum. I have not changed the way I live or dress, because I attended any of these churches, because I have been more conservative then even the most conservative of these.
All of these churches have been places where I grew and drew closer to God. All of these also preached the basic Acts message. All of these churches had their own strengths and weaknesses. But all of them had people who loved God and were reaching out for the lost, which is a church that I want to attend.
Which is why I have said several times that I would rather attend a church like Eddie and Sherri's church, then one where they may dress the same way I do, but inside are full of dead men's bones.
Let me also say that some of the worst attitudes in people I have encountered in those "conservative" churches and some of the most caring people have been in the "liberal" church I attended. This is not a generalization, but I think that as people, it is easy for us to look at those who have turned from what they once believed as "backslidden" and it is easy for those who have "left the mothership" to look at those still there as being in "bondage".
As the good book says, "who are we to judge another man's servant"?