Originally Posted by mizpeh (Post 716308)

If we want to call ourselves "Apostolic" shouldn't our landmarks be those that were set up by the original apostles?

Originally Posted by bhoutreach (Post 716225)

NO I am not. How ever It is clear that there should be clothing that is distinctly mens and distinctly womens.

If women have dress and skirts. Plus wear pants. Then men have nothing that is distinct to men. This is a problem.

Originally Posted by bhoutreach (Post 716245)

I suspected this was not the forum for this topic. That is why I started it. .

Originally Posted by Sam (Post 716303)

If our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart.
God may convict us but He will not condemn us.
Because we "feel" condemned by something does not mean that something is wrong. We are to go by the Word, not by our feelings. I just read a note I had written in my Bible next to 1 John 5:10-13:
D.L. Moody (1837-1899) said, "I believe hundreds of Christians are being deceived by satan now on this point. They don't have the assurance of salvation just because they are not willing to take God at His Word."

A former pastor of mine (who was UPC District Superintendent of Ohio) told us a story about when he was young. He was going to a Nazarene Church which preached strict adherence to "rules." They taught that we under the New Testament were supposed to obey certain parts of the Old Testament law such as the 10 commandments, but they taught that Sunday was now the sabbath. Since Sunday was the sabbath it was a sin to do any work on the sabbath and a sin to pay someone else to work on the sabbath so paying for a bus ride or buying anything on Sunday was wrong. He was going to a storefront church. One Sunday he and a friend were looking at a large pulpit Bible in their church. It was open to a passage in Hebrews and was marked about committing the "unpardonable" sin. It was a very hot day and they had quite a distance to walk to get home. It would have been a sin to ride a bus because they would be paying someone to work and causing that person to sin. So they walked the long distance toward home. Of course they were dressed in clothes that did not make the journey any easier. Finally, in desperation they stopped at a store that was open and bought an ice cream cone --a sin because they were paying someone to desecrate the sabbath by working. As soon as he took that first lick of ice cream he became very "convicted" and realized he had committed the "unpardonable sin." Now where did that "conviction" or "condemnation" come from?

Originally Posted by mizpeh (Post 716308)

If we want to call ourselves "Apostolic" shouldn't our landmarks be those that were set up by the original apostles?

Originally Posted by Sam (Post 716303)

If our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart.
God may convict us but He will not condemn us.
Because we "feel" condemned by something does not mean that something is wrong. We are to go by the Word, not by our feelings. I just read a note I had written in my Bible next to 1 John 5:10-13:
D.L. Moody (1837-1899) said, "I believe hundreds of Christians are being deceived by satan now on this point. They don't have the assurance of salvation just because they are not willing to take God at His Word."

A former pastor of mine (who was UPC District Superintendent of Ohio) told us a story about when he was young. He was going to a Nazarene Church which preached strict adherence to "rules." They taught that we under the New Testament were supposed to obey certain parts of the Old Testament law such as the 10 commandments, but they taught that Sunday was now the sabbath. Since Sunday was the sabbath it was a sin to do any work on the sabbath and a sin to pay someone else to work on the sabbath so paying for a bus ride or buying anything on Sunday was wrong. He was going to a storefront church. One Sunday he and a friend were looking at a large pulpit Bible in their church. It was open to a passage in Hebrews and was marked about committing the "unpardonable" sin. It was a very hot day and they had quite a distance to walk to get home. It would have been a sin to ride a bus because they would be paying someone to work and causing that person to sin. So they walked the long distance toward home. Of course they were dressed in clothes that did not make the journey any easier. Finally, in desperation they stopped at a store that was open and bought an ice cream cone --a sin because they were paying someone to desecrate the sabbath by working. As soon as he took that first lick of ice cream he became very "convicted" and realized he had committed the "unpardonable sin." Now where did that "conviction" or "condemnation" come from?

Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace* (Post 716314)

In the garden, when God made clothes for Adam and Eve, he made them both coats. It doesn't mention that he made them different at all.

Throughout Bible times men and women both wore robes (dresses). There was supposed to be a fringe on one of them to differentiate, but that's all.

It just doesn't seem like a biblical concept that men and women's clothing must be drastically different.




Actually, this forum is full of threads discussing this very subject. :) A lot of interesting discussions.

Originally Posted by Sam (Post 716317)

The Apostles didn't all agree on everything.
The Jerusalem believers as led by James the Lord's brother were known for keeping the Old Testament Law with animal sacrifices. In Acts 21:20 (May AD 57) we are told that there were many thousands (Greek word muriades or ten thousands) of Jewish believers who are zealous for the law. Paul was requested to pay for the animals that 4 of the brethren were to sacrifice as they finished a Nazarite vow. Yet many other Christians did not observe sabbaths, new moons, feast days, circumcision, animal sacrifices, tithing, etc.

Originally Posted by mizpeh (Post 716322)

A landmark would be something ALL agreed to, Sam, and usually it is a matter of principle and not law.

Originally Posted by pelathais (Post 716236)

The statement you cite in Proverbs involved respecting another man's fields and inheritance. Another verse just a bit further: Proverbs 23:10, clearly shows that the landmark was to keep people from stealing land and crops from those who were weaker than they. Job 24:2 echoes this same concern.

Originally Posted by Pastor Keith (Post 716277)

Lets talk about Landmarks of the Fathers, I posted this some time back.

Have you ever been curious how the First Church regarded standards, holiness and living in a pagan culture?

Well this is a testimony by a Disciple of Polycarp named Mathetes, who most likely wrote this between 100-140AD.

I think to be an eye opener and will likely change your perspective on how the early church related to and lived in a pagan world. I highlighted some parts that I thought would be of interest to our diverse forum.

It was titled "The Manner of Christians"

For the Christians are distinguished from other men neither by country, nor language, nor the customs which they observe. For they neither inhabit cities of their own, nor employ a peculiar form of speech, nor lead a life which is marked out by any singularity. The course of conduct which they follow has not been devised by any speculation or deliberation of inquisitive men; nor do they, like some, proclaim themselves the advocates of any merely human doctrines. But, inhabiting Greek as well as barbarian cities, according as the lot of each of them has determined, and following the customs of the natives in respect to clothing, food, and the rest of their ordinary conduct, they display to us their wonderful and confessedly striking [281] method of life. They dwell in their own countries, but simply as sojourners. As citizens, they share in all things with others, and yet endure all things as if foreigners. Every foreign land is to them as their native country, and every land of their birth as a land of strangers. They marry, as do all [others]; they beget children; but they do not destroy their offspring. [282] They have a common table, but not a common bed. [283] They are in the flesh, but they do not live after the flesh. [284] They pass their days on earth, but they are citizens of heaven. [285] They obey the prescribed laws, and at the same time surpass the laws by their lives. They love all men, and are persecuted by all. They are unknown and condemned; they are put to death, and restored to life. [286] They are poor, yet make many rich; [287] they are in lack of all things, and yet abound in all; they are dishonoured, and yet in their very dishonour are glorified. They are evil spoken of, and yet are justified; they are reviled, and bless; [288] they are insulted, and repay the insult with honour; they do good, yet are punished as evil-doers. When punished, they rejoice as if quickened into life; they are assailed by the Jews as foreigners, and are persecuted by the Greeks; yet those who hate them are unable to assign any reason for their hatred.

Originally Posted by bhoutreach (Post 716161)

Prov 22:28
28 Remove not the ancient landmark, which thy fathers have set.

I find it interesting that many after being blessed by finding the Truth, begin to seek ways to change what they have received.

Men and women before us understood the strength in Holiness, both inside and out. They were wise enough to know that the NEW BIRTH experience was just the beginning. Men were to dress like men and women like women. Because this was right in the eyes to the LORD. And still is. Men and women were to dress modestly and still should. Uncut hair on a women was her covering and showed her submission to her head and long hair on a man was a shame and still is.

Just because culture changes it's view does not mean the church should or that GOD has.

I am progressive in the sense that I believe we should change our methods for reaching the world in need. I am an old time preacher in the sense that I do not believe we should ever change our MESSAGE, any of it.