Apostolic Friends Forum

Apostolic Friends Forum (http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/index.php)
-   The D.A.'s Office (http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/forumdisplay.php?f=65)
-   -   DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity, (http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/showthread.php?t=28450)

iceniez 02-05-2010 02:01 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by rgcraig (Post 874495)
divided or pants

WOW thanks

Timmy 02-05-2010 02:01 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Timmy (Post 874498)
Well, I thought I was being funny, but turns out, that's exactly right!

fur∑cate (fŻrkt)
intr.v. fur∑cat∑ed, fur∑cat∑ing, fur∑cates
To divide into branches; fork.
adj.
Divided into branches; forked.

(Bifurcated garments are pants! :thumbsup)

(...or shorts, or boxers, or panties, or bloomers, or bikini bottoms, or ...)

Sam 02-05-2010 02:01 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by iceniez (Post 874492)
I have to ask............what does BIFURCATED GARMENT mean ?

it means "sinful" if worn by a woman

iceniez 02-05-2010 02:02 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Timmy (Post 874498)
Well, I thought I was being funny, but turns out, that's exactly right!

fur∑cate (fŻrkt)
intr.v. fur∑cat∑ed, fur∑cat∑ing, fur∑cates
To divide into branches; fork.
adj.
Divided into branches; forked.

(Bifurcated garments are pants! :thumbsup)

Thats amazing..............

Sam 02-05-2010 02:03 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Timmy (Post 874501)
(...or shorts, or boxers, or panties, or bloomers, or bikini bottoms, or ...)

some also include pantyhose in that list

iceniez 02-05-2010 02:03 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sam (Post 874502)
it means "sinful" if worn by a woman

I am not a woman so I'm ok then.

iceniez 02-05-2010 02:04 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
So Does it apply today ?

Timmy 02-05-2010 02:06 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sam (Post 874504)
some also include pantyhose in that list

Well, sure! And space suits, waders, sweatpants, jammy bottoms, gauchos, and culottes.

Timmy 02-05-2010 02:07 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by iceniez (Post 874507)
So Does it apply today ?

God's Word never changes.

Sam 02-05-2010 02:07 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by iceniez (Post 874507)
So Does it apply today ?

If other parts of the law of Moses apply today --like animal sacrifices; sabbath days and sabbath years; tithing; circumcision; Aaronic priesthood; kosher food; garment fringe; etc. apply today, then the ban on bifurcated garments for women would also apply.

iceniez 02-05-2010 02:09 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sam (Post 874510)
If other parts of the law of Moses apply today --like animal sacrifices; sabbath days and sabbath years; tithing; circumcision; Aaronic priesthood; kosher food; garment fringe; etc. apply today, then the ban on bifurcated garments for women would also apply.

Thank you

Timmy 02-05-2010 02:09 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sam (Post 874510)
If other parts of the law of Moses apply today --like animal sacrifices; sabbath days and sabbath years; tithing; circumcision; Aaronic priesthood; kosher food; garment fringe; etc. apply today, then the ban on bifurcated garments for women would also apply.

Matthew 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

iceniez 02-05-2010 02:20 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Timmy (Post 874512)
Matthew 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

I guess I asked ,because I struggle with Standards [ dress standards ] or how people use them to mesure how spiritual somone is or even if they are saved.I have seen so many people leave because they were told they were going to hell for wearing pants . Thheese were new people in the church people that I wittnessed to and brought to church seen them Baptized and recieve the Holy Ghost. To tell you the truth it is part of the reason I do not wittness to people and bring them to church now.

192281 02-05-2010 02:29 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by iceniez (Post 874515)
I guess I asked ,because I struggle with Standards [ dress standards ] or how people use them to mesure how spiritual somone is or even if they are saved.I have seen so many people leave because they were told they were going to hell for wearing pants . Thheese were new people in the church people that I wittnessed to and brought to church seen them Baptized and recieve the Holy Ghost. To tell you the truth it is part of the reason I do not wittness to people and bring them to church now.

In my opinion you should never stop witnessing to people and telling them about the love of Jesus but I do understand where you are coming from. I have no problem with people who uphold the standards that they believe are important for them and their salvation. My problem is with people who push their standards on others and seem to think that those who don't do as they do are sinful or have zero standards.
I attend a UPC church and love my church. I have a wonderful Pastor and I respect him greatly. I believe we should all uphold modesty but I don't think we should tell someone they canít be used in our church until they do this and that (those things being outward standards set by man). We look at someone who receives the wonderful salvation of God and then expect them to change by some point and if not we say they dont have it fully and until they conform they canít be used.
My problem isnít with having a different standard my problem is with making it a heaven/hell issue and making people feel as though they dont have the HG or arenít saved because they dont feel convicted to do what you tell them they should be convicted about..

Sorry went on a rant..

Timmy 02-05-2010 02:34 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by iceniez (Post 874515)
I guess I asked ,because I struggle with Standards [ dress standards ] or how people use them to mesure how spiritual somone is or even if they are saved.I have seen so many people leave because they were told they were going to hell for wearing pants . Thheese were new people in the church people that I wittnessed to and brought to church seen them Baptized and recieve the Holy Ghost. To tell you the truth it is part of the reason I do not wittness to people and bring them to church now.

Well, I don't suppose my post was helpful. Sorry about that.

If you don't mind my asking, why do you attend a church that you aren't comfortable inviting people to?

iceniez 02-05-2010 02:36 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by 192281 (Post 874521)
In my opinion you should never stop witnessing to people and telling them about the love of Jesus but I do understand where you are coming from. I have no problem with people who uphold the standards that they believe are important for them and their salvation. My problem is with people who push their standards on others and seem to think that those who don't do as they do are sinful or have zero standards.
I attend a UPC church and love my church. I have a wonderful Pastor and I respect him greatly. I believe we should all uphold modesty but I don't think we should tell someone they canít be used in our church until they do this and that (those things being outward standards set by man). We look at someone who receives the wonderful salvation of God and then expect them to change by some point and if not we say they dont have it fully and until they conform they canít be used.
My problem isnít with having a different standard my problem is with making it a heaven/hell issue and making people feel as though they dont have the HG or arenít saved because they dont feel convicted to do what you tell them they should be convicted about..

Sorry went on a rant..

That is it exactly. and I do witness about Jesus and how good he is .It is killing me inside because I am evangalistic by nature and want people to go to heaven.

Sam 02-05-2010 02:36 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by iceniez (Post 874515)
I guess I asked ,because I struggle with Standards [ dress standards ] or how people use them to mesure how spiritual somone is or even if they are saved.I have seen so many people leave because they were told they were going to hell for wearing pants . Thheese were new people in the church people that I wittnessed to and brought to church seen them Baptized and recieve the Holy Ghost. To tell you the truth it is part of the reason I do not wittness to people and bring them to church now.

That's a problem with bringing folks to church and not to Jesus. Our churches offer rules and measurements but Jesus offers love, acceptance, and forgiveness.

iceniez 02-05-2010 02:38 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Timmy (Post 874523)
Well, I don't suppose my post was helpful. Sorry about that.

If you don't mind my asking, why do you attend a church that you aren't comfortable inviting people to?

No Timmy, that's not it I know you aren't being judgemental.

iceniez 02-05-2010 02:39 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sam (Post 874525)
That's a problem with bringing folks to church and not to Jesus. Our churches offer rules and measurements but Jesus offers love, acceptance, and forgiveness.

So true, but how does one seperate the Church from Jesus. Or Jesus from the Church ?

iceniez 02-05-2010 02:45 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Be back soon .

Sam 02-05-2010 02:49 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by iceniez (Post 874527)
So true, but how does one seperate the Church from Jesus. Or Jesus from the Church ?

Jesus is the Head of the Church.
The Church is His Body.
Anyone who has believed in Him and confessed Him as Lord has been placed/baptized into His Body by His Spirit.
There is only one Church made up of Jesus and all those who believe in Him.
That one Church transcends all of our denominations/organizations/clubs/unions.
The one Church, the Body of Christ, the Bride of Christ called by His Name, is that group of people that Jesus promised to build up or edify in Matthew 16:18 where He calls them "my church."

There are local "churches" where people gather and meet.
People in those local churches may or may not be part of the Body of Christ or of the one true Church.
The definition of a local Church given by Jesus is two or more gathered in His name (ref Matthew 18:20).

*AQuietPlace* 02-05-2010 02:53 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sam (Post 874510)
If other parts of the law of Moses apply today --like animal sacrifices; sabbath days and sabbath years; tithing; circumcision; Aaronic priesthood; kosher food; garment fringe; etc. apply today, then the ban on bifurcated garments for women would also apply.

Except, of course, there never was a ban on bifurcated garments for women in the law.

Sam 02-05-2010 02:59 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace* (Post 874533)
Except there never was a ban on bifurcated garments for women in the law.

I know that.
I'm speaking a little TIC here.

I'm saying that if we believe Deut. 22:5 applies to modern "pants" and is part of the new covenant then all those other 600 some rules should be also.

Justin 02-05-2010 03:15 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sam (Post 874538)
I know that.
I'm speaking a little TIC here.

I'm saying that if we believe Deut. 22:5 applies to modern "pants" and is part of the new covenant then all those other 600 some rules should be also.

I agree, but some cannot get off of the "principle" that male and female must dress differently. Bernard stated in his latest Male and Female message that if pants were culturally acceptable by woman, while something entirely different was culturally acceptable, pants on a woman would be ok according to Duet 22:5.

Again, focusing on the outward.

*AQuietPlace* 02-05-2010 03:38 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sam (Post 874538)
I know that.
I'm speaking a little TIC here.

I'm saying that if we believe Deut. 22:5 applies to modern "pants" and is part of the new covenant then all those other 600 some rules should be also.

I knew you knew. ;)

You're a smart man, I always enjoy your posts.

pelathais 02-05-2010 04:05 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by iceniez (Post 874492)
I have to ask............what does BIFURCATED GARMENT mean ?

It was also a term that was used by a group of UPC ministers in the lead up to the 2009 General Conference. They were basically making a call for the UPC to adopt their vision and opinions.

Among their points was a denunciation of women wearing "bifurcated" garments. That is, slacks, women's jeans, pant suits, sweats, pajama bottoms "with legs" and shorts under their skirts.

Many of these men supported "alternative" camp meetings outside the UPC district camps where the under garments and night gowns of the girls were actually inspected to make certain that they conformed to the "non-bifurcated" edicts.

They took so much heat for being so silly that they have since edited their web site to drop the phrase (http://wedeclare.org/). Many folks (myself included) will use the term to remind them just how nonsensical some of their demands really are.

Sam 02-05-2010 08:31 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Brother David (Post 874560)
It was also a term that was used by a group of UPC ministers in the lead up to the 2009 General Conference. They were basically making a call for the UPC to adopt their vision and opinions.

Among their points was a denunciation of women wearing "bifurcated" garments. That is, slacks, women's jeans, pant suits, sweats, pajama bottoms "with legs" and shorts under their skirts.

Many of these men supported "alternative" camp meetings outside the UPC district camps where the under garments and night gowns of the girls were actually inspected to make certain that they conformed to the "non-bifurcated" edicts.

They took so much heat for being so silly that they have since edited their web site to drop the phrase (http://wedeclare.org/). Many folks (myself included) will use the term to remind them just how nonsensical some of their demands really are.

Who decided who got to inspect the ladies underwear and sleepwear?

Will McLeod 02-06-2010 09:13 AM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
:lol:lol
Quote:

Originally Posted by Brother David (Post 874273)
Okay, Will. Peace.

I still say that original post by you perhaps reflected one of the best understandings of the nuances and complexities of language that I've seen on AFF. I was really looking forward to your contributions.

I apologize for my absurdist "bathroom humor" which I see now was the root of our problem.

I do have something of an "absurdist" take on much of human affairs having found myself pushed into Absurdism for a period of time by my inability to get the Fundamentalism I was raised with to make any sense.

I have since rebounded from that epoch of my life, filled with the wonder of "meaningfulness" that I observe in the world around me. But as far as human affairs go... I still have trouble shaking the absurdist tendencies. http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...ons/icon11.gif

David, I hope to have some good intriguing conversations with you as well. No hard feelings. We are both grown ups here. Everyone needs to vent sometimes. Its the human nature. I wonder if it has anything to do with "carbon dioxide" in the atmospere? :lol

Justin 02-06-2010 02:13 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
For Will:

Quote:

Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace* (Post 871240)
No matter how you interpret these scriptures, you are left with this fact:

Men and women both wore robes during the time Deut. was written. For over 5,000 years of recorded human history, men and women both wore robes. Now, men and women both wear pants.

Nowhere in the Bible does it demand that men and women dress drastically different. Nowhere does it demand that they must be dressed completely different from the waist down.

There were slight differences in men and women's robes, there are slight differences in men and women's pants.

Women's pants is not a man's garment. I don't know a single man who would be caught dead in a pair of women's pants.

We have taken a cultural issue that was faced during the 1920s or thereabout, and forced Deut. to address that issue. It doesn't. Men had transitioned from robes to pants several hundred years before, now women were making that transition. It caused an uproar, because it was a transition, and transitions always cause an uproar. There is historical evidence that there was the same uproar when men transitioned from robes to pants. They were seen as immodest.

Men and women have worn the same general garment, with some distinctive differences, for most of human history. If you walk into Walmart, you can tell at a glance, without reading the signs, whether you're in the men's clothing department, or the women's. There is still an easily noticeable difference between men's and women's clothing.

I've bought jeans at a garage sale before, thinking they were boys. My sons would begin to put them on, and then whip them right back off, exclaiming - "These are girls' pants! I'm not wearing these!" The cut is different, the pockets are different, the button is different. It's a woman's garment, not a man's. Women's pants don't 'pertain to' a man. They pertain to a woman. That's why my sons won't wear them.


pelathais 02-06-2010 04:30 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sam (Post 874626)
Who decided who got to inspect the ladies underwear and sleepwear?

Dunno - I can only hope it was done by "sisters." But, as someone had posted on here a while back - they lined up the baggage as each camper checked in and did an inspection.

pelathais 02-06-2010 04:32 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Will McLeod (Post 874726)
:lol:lol

David, I hope to have some good intriguing conversations with you as well. No hard feelings. We are both grown ups here. Everyone needs to vent sometimes. Its the human nature. I wonder if it has anything to do with "carbon dioxide" in the atmospere? :lol

My son left the propane valve open on the grill the other day. I blamed him for the "disappearing Himalayan glaciers!"

Justin 03-23-2010 12:28 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Pressing-On (Post 871233)
Thank you for your contribution to this thread, Will. Good points!

I was wondering if you have studied the word "wear" in Deut 22:5? I notice it is used only one time in the OT. It appears to have a different meaning than to just put on clothing.

Strongest Strong's says "wear" includes 1961+5921

1961 - "to exist, that is to be or become....."

Could you comment on that, if you have the time? I was of the understanding that Deut 22:5 is referring to homosexuality.

A primitive root (compare H1933); to exist, that is, be or become, come to pass (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary)

It's important to note that this Hebrew word occurs in the Old Testament 1162 times, and only once is translated in 'wear'. 538 times it is translated in to "came", 136 times it's translated as "come", 83 times in to "had", 67 times in to "become", 66 times in to "became", etc.

Another important note is that in verse 11: "Thou shalt not wear a garment of divers sorts, as of woollen and linen together.", the Hebrew word for "wear" in this verse is:

Strongs H3847: lâbash lâbêsh (law-bash', law-bashe')

A primitive root; properly wrap around, that is, (by implication) to put on a garment or clothe (oneself, or another), literally or figuratively: - (in) apparel, arm, array (self), clothe (self), come upon, put (on, upon), wear.

"Wear" is verse 11 is vastly different from the "wear" in verse 5. Verse 11's "wear" occurs 112 times in the Old Testament, it's translated in to "put" 41 times, "clothed" 39 times, "clothe" 12 times, "arrayed" 4 times, "wear" 4 times, etc.

So we come to the conclusion that it wasn't an abomination to simply "wear" the clothing, but the abomination was in the act of doing so for the effect to "become" the opposite sex; as is a cross dresser which was looking to engage an homosexual behavior, hence the "abomination".

If the abomination was simply in "putting on" clothes of the culture deemed appropriate for one sex or another, God would has used the same Hebrew word in verse 5 as he did for verse 11.

In other words, if you're going to wear clothes of the opposite sex in order to fulfill a desire to "become" or "exist" as the opposite by means of homosexuality, then that is an abomination.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:16 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.