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)

Jeffrey 01-19-2010 01:15 PM

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

Originally Posted by DeuteronomyCh8 (Post 867408)
I believe the scripture is rather "plain" in its meaning. It needs no interpretation.

That's the error, no matter the level, you are making an interpretation.

It may as well be the right one. Since you are a Master of Hebrew literature written thousands of years ago, and you feel confident lazily reading into ancient texts your 21st Centuriy biases, then have right at it.

rgcraig 01-19-2010 01:16 PM

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

Originally Posted by DeuteronomyCh8 (Post 867411)
YES.....show me this! Lets see it! Please. Pants origin...lets have it. By the way are you circumcised?

No. :ursofunny

Jeffrey 01-19-2010 01:17 PM

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

Originally Posted by DeuteronomyCh8 (Post 867411)
YES.....show me this! Lets see it! Please. Pants origin...lets have it. By the way are you circumcised?

:ursofunny

Was that a funny you were making?


You do realize who Galatians was written to, and concerning?

freeatlast 01-19-2010 01:24 PM

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

Originally Posted by DeuteronomyCh8 (Post 867408)
I believe the scripture is rather "plain" in its meaning. It needs no interpretation.

You mean you know that if you do you will find it does not mean what you want to think it says.

your statement...it needs no interpretation, is one of the laziest ignorant statements I have heard, in supposed defense of the error of the "apostolic identiy" misinterpretation of this scripture that has been ripped from the 613 laws of Torah.

John Atkinson 01-19-2010 01:24 PM

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

Originally Posted by DeuteronomyCh8 (Post 867411)
YES.....show me this! Lets see it! Please. Pants origin...lets have it. By the way are you circumcised?

Ok so I missed that one, but that still doesn't mean that a lady is violating the word of God by taking a scripture out of context to make it say what you want it to say.

As to the second that falls firmly in the NONE OF YOU BUSINESS category.

rgcraig 01-19-2010 01:33 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Deut - found this for you!

Origin of Words - "Pants"

Most often words of one syllable have Anglo-Saxon roots but occasionally one slips into English from the classics. One such is the word pants. Everyone knows the meaning of this word so why do I offer it to you here? It travelled a very interesting route to find its way to mean trousers or slacks.

William Safire cleverly explained this route in a N Y Times article in the Sunday Magazine section. I regret I do not have the date it was published.

In his article he explains that a Christian doctor was condemned to death by the Romans in the 3rd century for aiding the poor. He was to be beheaded but survived the six attempts to take his life. Later the Church canonized him, giving him the name "Saint Pantaleone". "Pan" is Greek for "all' and "leo" is the Latin word for "lion". He was given this title to recognize his strength and courage. In time he became the patron saint of physicians. Looking for such courage and strength in their sons, numerous boys were christened with his name.

Where did "pants" come into this picture? In ca. 800, in comic drama according to Robert Hendrickson in his book " Facts on File, An Encyclopedia of Word and Phrase Origins", the fool in a comic production was called panteleon...all lion. In time this changed to "pantaloon". The actor was dressed in breeches that were tight below the knee but which bloused out in a full puffy fashion from the waist to the knee.

In the 18th century the costume became one worn by many men. This famous portrait found in the Louvre shows Louis XIV in a full pose, showing off his legs in a ''pantaloon'' costume. The term was shortened to "pants" in the 1840s. The term pantaloons continued to be used when referring to the undergarment worn by women under hoop skirts in the same period.

http://www.dl.ket.org/latin3/vocab/e...tory/pants.htm

*AQuietPlace* 01-19-2010 01:46 PM

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

Originally Posted by Jeffrey (Post 867333)
DA, those leaving are presented with some harsh realities. First, a rejection of those they've known for years. Second, the ugly reality that many UPC churches that leave deal with many issues not common with your local AOG or Baptist church down the road. It's as if the new-found freedom takes over. Instead of the raw Jesus culture, unfortunately, many turn to license for anything to feed their carnal appetite. They are leaving to fulfill a Jesus appetite, and instead encounter people unsure how to balance themselves without the heavy weights of Old Pentecost on their back. So, many fall. Some, wobble around. Some have permanent crooked backs. Some figure it out and get through it. But make no mistake, all of us are scarred, because we were wired in a such a way that viewed God, the church, the ministry and the world in a certain way that it's hard to undo.

So true.

Justin 01-19-2010 02:06 PM

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

Originally Posted by DAII (Post 867064)

Quote:

Originally Posted by DAII (Post 867078)
The Grays, Apostolic missionaries to Japan

http://photos-b.ak.fbcdn.net/photos-...32_5358611.jpg

Quote:

Originally Posted by DAII (Post 867079)

Quote:

Originally Posted by DAII (Post 867080)
WAS WONDERING WHEN WE RETURN TO THE OLD LANDMARKS?

"We did not wear uniforms. The lady workers dressed in the current fashions of the day, ...silks...satins...jewels or whatever they happened to possess. They were very smartly turned out, so that they made an impressive appearance on the streets where a large part of our work was conducted in the early years." ---

Ethel Goss (widow of 1st UPC Gen Supt. Howard Goss)

Dan,

Couldn't someone say that these pictures and testimonies were isolated incidents and didn't represent a "true sample" of today's "Holiness Standards"?

Possibly these woman cut their hair before the "revelation" of 1 Corinthians 11?

Jeffrey 01-19-2010 02:08 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Justin, either way it shows that these so-called "revelations" are not ancient, nor even that old, but fairly new. I think that's their value.

Michael Phelps 01-19-2010 02:31 PM

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

Originally Posted by DeuteronomyCh8 (Post 867350)
I dont think theres anything wrong with "open toed" shoes. Its not biblical. But the Bible does give authority to the minstry to use their own judgement. That is Biblical. Dont like it....go to another church. If it can be backed up with a Biblical "precept or principal" thats different.

Folks, that's a scary statement. Unfortunately, too many people believe this, that's why pastors can preach against oral sex, Christmas trees and county fairs, and people will still continue to support them with their tithe and offering.

Michael Phelps 01-19-2010 02:34 PM

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

Originally Posted by DeuteronomyCh8 (Post 867392)
The ONLY "bifurcated" garment in the old testament was worn by the priest!
My question to you is this


IS IT WRONG FOR A MAN TO WEAR A SKIRT or DRESS ????????

Not in Scotland.

DAII 01-19-2010 03:11 PM

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

Originally Posted by Jeffrey (Post 867403)
Bump for Deut.

Will you try and post a photo of yourself in a pair of women's pants?

It's that easy to refute ...

Go to Macy's and find yourself some female pants in the female section and wear them.

Share the pic, Deuty.

missourimary 01-19-2010 03:39 PM

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

Originally Posted by DeuteronomyCh8 (Post 867376)
Well I guess we would have to look at Moses for this answer. Or Paul.....or Peter. Your argument is only Valid to a certain extent. Why bother going to church if the pastor doesnt carry any discretion.

They murmured against Moses as well. So now what. Hey you have ALL the ANSWERS.....You dont need a preacher! You know the BIBLE. YOU know what you believe. Theres no need for church or the ministry....Correct???

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeuteronomyCh8 (Post 867384)
Why do you go?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeuteronomyCh8 (Post 867394)
But NOT for answers? Interesting. So they should just READ the word and you take it for what you want??

Strangely, within these statements lies a pretty interesting thought.

Go back to Acts and find every instance that one of the disciples went to church to get answers. Even go to Corinthians if you want. At least once (when the young man fell out the window) someone spoke. But it does not say they gathered to hear the word preached. Why did the NT church gather most often? They gathered for prayer and fellowship and breaking of bread. Not to get answers. They had the answer. His name is Jesus.

missourimary 01-19-2010 03:43 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Back to the topic, I would be interested in seeing that picture of a man in women's pants, too.

I have heard it preached that women didn't cut their hair before the flapper style in the early 1920s. I've also heard that women never wore pants before they went to work in factories in WWII.

My grandmother wore pants in the 30s. I've seen the pictures. And not just in the house, either. And a research project I did in college turned up some interesting info about women cutting their hair before the bob. They may not have gone to barbers and had their hair styled and cut short, but at least some did cut it.

*AQuietPlace* 01-19-2010 03:53 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Women cut their hair in many ancient civilizations.

DAII 01-19-2010 04:15 PM

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

Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace* (Post 867479)
Women cut their hair in many ancient civilizations.

In the traditionalist paradigm history, centers around Western European civilization with American culture and traditions as the focal point ....

Other civilizations' traditions, modes of dress are pagan in this light ....

Women wearing pants for centuries in Eastern civilization is irrelevant ..

Males wearing skirts for the bulk of history is ignored.

Apostolic Identity is Victorian and uniquely shaped by the American experience.

Fiji, Scotland, Persia, et al... need not apply. After all, America is is Israel reincarnated.

Apocrypha 01-19-2010 04:18 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histori...ian_hairstyles

Early Christians

The paintings in the catacombs permit the belief that the early Christians simply followed the fashion of their time. The short hair of the men and the waved tresses of the women were, towards the end of the second century, curled, frizzed with irons, and arranged in tiers, while for women the hair twined about the head forming a high diadem over the brow. Particular locks were reserved to fall over the forehead and upon the temples.
Christian iconography still proceeds in accordance with types created in the beginning of Christianity. Images of Christ retain the long hair parted in the middle and flowing to the shoulders. Those of the Blessed Virgin still wear the veil which conceals a portion of the brow and confines the neck. The Orantes, which represent the generality of the faithful, have the hair covered by a full veil which falls to the shoulders. Byzantine iconography differs little as to head-dress from that of the catacombs. Mosaics and ivories portray emperors, bishops, priests and the faithful wearing the hair of a medium length, cut squarely across the forehead.
Women then wore a round head-dress which encircled the face. Emperors and empresses wore a large, low crown, wide at the top, ornamented with precious stones cut en cabochon, and jeweled pendants falling down to the shoulders, such as may be seen in the mosaics of S. Vitalis at Ravenna and a large number of diptychs. The hair of patriarchs and bishops was of medium length and was surmounted by a closed crown or a double tiara.
[edit]Middle Ages

The invading barbarians allowed their hair to grow freely, and to fall unrestrained on the shoulders. After the fall of the Merovingians, and while the invaders were conforming more and more to the prevailing Byzantine taste or fashion, they did not immediately take up the fashion of cutting the hair. Carloman, the brother of Charlemagne, is represented at the age of fourteen with his hair falling in long tresses behind.
Church councils regulated the head-dress of clerics and monks: according to St. Jerome's testimony, there were monks bearded like goats, and the Vita Hilarionis also states that certain persons considered it meritorious to cut hair each year at Easter. The Statuta antiqua Ecclesiae (can. xliv) forbade them to allow hair or beard to grow. A synod held by St. Patrick (can. vi) in 456 prescribed that the clerics should dress their hair in the manner of the Roman clerics, and those who allowed their hair to grow were expelled from the Church (can. x). The Council of Agde (506) authorized the archdeacon to employ force in cutting the hair of recalcitrants; the Council of Braga (572) ordained that the hair should be short, and the ears exposed. The Fourth Council of Toledo (633) denounced the lectors in Galicia who wore a small tonsure and allowed the hair to grow immoderately, and two Councils of Rome (721 and 743) anathematized those who should neglect the regulations in this matter.
In the ninth century there is more distinction between freemen and slaves, as regards the hair. Henceforth the slaves were no longer shorn save in punishment for certain offences. Under Louis the Débonnaire and Charles the Bald the hair was cut on the temples and the back of the head. In the tenth century the hair cut at the height of the ears fell regularly about the head. At the end of twelfth century the hair was shaven close on the top of the head and fell in long curls behind.
Fashions changed, from hair smooth on the top of the head and rising in a sudden roll in front, a tuft of hair in the form of a flame, or the more ordinary topknot. Not every one followed these fashions, but the exceptions were considered ridiculous.
[edit]Early Modern times

The clergy followed with a sort of timidity the fashion of the wig, but, except prelates and court chaplains, they refrained from the over-luxurious models. Priests contented themselves with wearing the wig in folio, or square, or the wig à la Sartine. They bared the part corresponding to the tonsure. In the religious orders, the tonsure very early interposed an obstacle to hairstyles, but the tonsure itself was the occasion of many combinations.

missourimary 01-19-2010 04:26 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Even in American history ladies wore pantaloons or bloomers, they wore "split skirts" (meaning bifurcated, like coulottes) to ride, and even wore pants to do harder work. When they went to town they "dressed up".

How many people know the origination of the woman's blouse? It was originally called a shirtwaist, and made similarly to a man's shirt. Many thought it was wrong.

Jeffrey 01-19-2010 04:56 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Deut, are you there???

DAII 01-19-2010 05:00 PM

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

Originally Posted by Jeffrey (Post 867495)
Deut, are you there???

Manny, Bob, Deuty?

pelathais 01-19-2010 05:06 PM

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

Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace* (Post 867479)
Women cut their hair in many ancient civilizations.

Shaving their heads was a common rite of passage at various times in their lives. Often this did not involve a razor type clean shave - but a close cropping. It was felt that a person's hair was a "witness" to some part of their life. When they passed that stage they did away with the "witness" and got a new start.

In most ancient Middle Eastern cultures woman of rank in the social order would keep their hair cut short for convenience and then wear wigs in public.

Male warriors in many societies would let their hair grow for as long as they were on a campaign. When the war and killing was over they shaved or cropped their heads to signify a "new start."

The Nazarite vows are similar to this in many regards.

*AQuietPlace* 01-19-2010 05:10 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
From drawings and paintings, it appears that Egyptian women cut theirs - usually with bangs straight across in front. And even though God gave the Israelites a lot of specific commands about what 'not to do like the pagans', women cutting their hair wasn't one of those commands. Which I find odd, if he didn't want them to do it.

pelathais 01-19-2010 05:12 PM

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

Originally Posted by DeuteronomyCh8 (Post 867383)
Your mockery of the scriptures is not amusing. Tell me your complaint. (?) Other than you have an axe to grind with any preacher that steps on your TV or anything YOU dont want to give up or comply with.

John asked you to consider the entire context of the chapter, and you call that "mockery" of Scripture?

?????

missourimary 01-19-2010 05:18 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Wow, I'm not going to dig back through everything, but in response to the following as quoted above by Dave:
_____________________________________________
Originally Posted by DeuteronomyCh8
Your mockery of the scriptures is not amusing. Tell me your complaint. (?) Other than you have an axe to grind with any preacher that steps on your TV or anything YOU dont want to give up or comply with.
_____________________________________________

I want to answer:

Just because people ask what is right doesn't mean they want to do wrong.
When people sincerely search scripture to ask questions or find answers, aren't they doing what God would want? That isn't mockery. That's wisdom.

DAII 01-19-2010 07:56 PM

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

Originally Posted by DAII (Post 867497)
Manny, Bob, Deuty?

Schmitty??????

Jason B 01-19-2010 09:36 PM

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

Originally Posted by DeuteronomyCh8 (Post 867350)
I dont think theres anything wrong with "open toed" shoes. Its not biblical. But the Bible does give authority to the minstry to use their own judgement. That is Biblical. Dont like it....go to another church. If it can be backed up with a Biblical "precept or principal" thats different.

can you feel the love of Christ up in here?

noeticknight 01-19-2010 11:09 PM

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

Originally Posted by DeuteronomyCh8 (Post 867350)
I dont think theres anything wrong with "open toed" shoes. Its not biblical. But the Bible does give authority to the minstry to use their own judgement. That is Biblical. Dont like it....go to another church. If it can be backed up with a Biblical "precept or principal" thats different.


Quote:

A foot isn’t sin. A foot fetish is most likely sinful.” -coadie-


Well, there you have it folks. This is how compromise starts out. "I don't think there is anything wrong with this or that." D, how can you not see the evil of open toe shoes! Sandals and the like were fashioned by lust-ridden designers obsessed with exposing parts of the foot that should not go uncovered. They incite and aggravate the fetish in some men that want to caress those cute little "piggies" wrapped up in the bondage of sandal leather straps. Where does it stop? What would that lead to? You think those men working in the nail salons that do the full treatment pedicures are just part of the family business? Gimmeabreak! They want to play with toes! At least coadie understands that much. And that is why we both know that churches should have a list of men "exempt" from footwashing, because we still aren't sure if just any sight of feet causes this downward path to evil.

Of course, I nearly thought you were a compromiser brother, that is, until I read the rest of your post. When you said that the preacher in the pulpit can exercise his God-given authority to make "executive decisions" when necessary. Amen! We need men of principle in this hour who will stand up and declare truth as they see it, even if that means adding a little to the Good Book! I see it like a good cook--nothing wrong with throwing in a pinch of salt here or a smidget of spice there for good measure. Men who will tell us what to wear, and which kinds of shoes will send us sliding head first into a devil's cauldron. I don't even want to study the Bible for myself. None of should really, cuz we might misinterpret something. Leave it to the professionals I say!

If peope don't like it, they can find another church! Amen brother! We don't need any more compromisers messing up a good thing! I'm tired of folks thinking they can come to God as they are, and then, when we give them ample time to change, they don't give up their heathen habits. Shame on these wannabe Christians who can't hack it with the real thing. Just remember D, we're Christians from head to toe. And if you see women letting down their hair in public, or wearing open toe shoes to church, mark them. Their message is loud and clear, "come and take my little piggies to the market..."

Sam 01-19-2010 11:58 PM

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

Originally Posted by DeuteronomyCh8 (Post 867392)
The ONLY "bifurcated" garment in the old testament was worn by the priest!
My question to you is this


IS IT WRONG FOR A MAN TO WEAR A SKIRT or DRESS ????????

Have men ever worn dresses/skirts/robes?

Jeffrey 01-20-2010 12:26 AM

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

Originally Posted by noeticknight (Post 867581)
Well, there you have it folks. This is how compromise starts out. "I don't think there is anything wrong with this or that." D, how can you not see the evil of open toe shoes! Sandals and the like were fashioned by lust-ridden designers obsessed with exposing parts of the foot that should not go uncovered. They incite and aggravate the fetish in some men that want to caress those cute little "piggies" wrapped up in the bondage of sandal leather straps. Where does it stop? What would that lead to? You think those men working in the nail salons that do the full treatment pedicures are just part of the family business? Gimmeabreak! They want to play with toes! At least coadie understands that much. And that is why we both know that churches should have a list of men "exempt" from footwashing, because we still aren't sure if just any sight of feet causes this downward path to evil.

Of course, I nearly thought you were a compromiser brother, that is, until I read the rest of your post. When you said that the preacher in the pulpit can exercise his God-given authority to make "executive decisions" when necessary. Amen! We need men of principle in this hour who will stand up and declare truth as they see it, even if that means adding a little to the Good Book! I see it like a good cook--nothing wrong with throwing in a pinch of salt here or a smidget of spice there for good measure. Men who will tell us what to wear, and which kinds of shoes will send us sliding head first into a devil's cauldron. I don't even want to study the Bible for myself. None of should really, cuz we might misinterpret something. Leave it to the professionals I say!

If peope don't like it, they can find another church! Amen brother! We don't need any more compromisers messing up a good thing! I'm tired of folks thinking they can come to God as they are, and then, when we give them ample time to change, they don't give up their heathen habits. Shame on these wannabe Christians who can't hack it with the real thing. Just remember D, we're Christians from head to toe. And if you see women letting down their hair in public, or wearing open toe shoes to church, mark them. Their message is loud and clear, "come and take my little piggies to the market..."

:ursofunny

Jeffrey 01-20-2010 12:27 AM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Of course, RW posted this clip, which somewhat supports Deut's claim that the MOG has every right to "add to the book" as he sees fit. This is the more articulate "academic" version of Deut's theology: http://www.therockchurch.org:/defaul...es-traditions/

jasites 01-20-2010 01:05 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
An outsiders observation:

1-DeuteronomyCh8, is definitely being way toohostile.
2-Jeffery, DAII and others are definitely being way too sarcastic.

I've only posted on this site a handful of times and I just came back today to get some news on BOTT. But everytime I visit, I see the same scenario. One group of posters "poke the stick" at others over and over, and there's always a good amount of sarcasm and "high-fives" between those of similar beliefs. Then someone gets upset (DeuteronomyCh8) and starts to rant and gets ugly. (Sorry, DeuteronomyCh8, but it's obvious) The only problem I have with this is when everyone (Jeffery, DAII and others) that has used sarcasm and made belittling remarks about a certain ideology, starts pointing the finger and acting appalled at the disgruntle poster (DeuteronomyCh8) who get offended and starts to rant. Neither side is right and neither side has clean hands. In reality though, I feel that it's a double whammy to then point fingers at the offended poster.

I'm sure that I will now be attacked by this post, but come on! Do you really feel that sarcasm is not offensive?? It's just ironic that some people use sarcasm and belittling comments in regards to a group of people or ideology movement, that they claim have offended and belittled so many.

Debates are great but this type of dialogue is just a huge turn-off to those who might consider frequently visiting this community.

Jeffrey 01-20-2010 01:14 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
Wow, was I that bad? Just pointing out the incredulity of the "evidence."

Okay, imperfect I am. It's the nature of an impersonal forum discussing ideas that make people emotional. Thanks for stopping in to fix it all :) (yes, that was sarcasm haha)

missourimary 01-20-2010 01:14 PM

Re: DKB Shares His Vision: Apostolic Identity,
 
jasites, come back more often. I wish I could say that there won't be any sarcasm or poking, but we would enjoy your input. That kind of levelheadedness is needed everywhere.

jasites 01-20-2010 01:27 PM

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

Originally Posted by Jeffrey (Post 867815)
Wow, was I that bad? Just pointing out the incredulity of the "evidence."

Okay, imperfect I am. It's the nature of an impersonal forum discussing ideas that make people emotional. Thanks for stopping in to fix it all :) (yes, that was sarcasm haha)

Sorry, I just pulled some names that came to mind.

Question: Do the ones on here that disagree with the UPC's stance on holiness have any generalized agreement on dress code. Meaning, do these individuals feel that no line should be drawn or that the line or "bar" should be lowered?

RandyWayne 01-20-2010 01:35 PM

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

Originally Posted by jasites (Post 867820)
Sorry, I just pulled some names that came to mind.

Question: Do the ones on here that disagree with the UPC's stance on holiness have any generalized agreement on dress code. Meaning, do these individuals feel that no line should be drawn or that the line or "bar" should be lowered?

If I may chime in.....

No, I do not believe there is any generalized agreement on dress code. I DO believe that everyone HAS one, it is just that no two are the same. THIS then is one of the issues when dealing with one particular persons/organizations dress standard and why "we" do not agree with it or the (very) week bible used as evidence (which, to top is off, is more often then not made into a heaven or hell issue).

dizzyde 01-20-2010 01:41 PM

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

Originally Posted by Michael Phelps (Post 866610)
Let's take the UPCI out of the equasion for a minute, I would venture to say that ANY religious organization which puts more focus on identification of the members than they do infiltration of a lost world is going backwards.

Are we more interested in "REvival" or "SURvival"?

This has been my soapbox for a long time, too many churches (Apostolic and non-apostolic) have become showcases instead of distribution centers. How many messages in a given week throughout America are centered on the saints vs. the sinners?

I realize that teaching and preaching to the saints is necessary, but when the focus of our service is keeping the saints saved and not on evangelizing the world, we're out of balance.

Go thru this little exercise - count the instances in the New Testament where Jesus preached to the saved versus ministering to the lost. You'll find that when He DID preach to the saints, it was almost inevitably challenging them to go and minister to the sinners!

Pastor Mike is preachin!!!

Pressing-On 01-20-2010 01:46 PM

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

Originally Posted by jasites (Post 867820)
Sorry, I just pulled some names that came to mind.

Question: Do the ones on here that disagree with the UPC's stance on holiness have any generalized agreement on dress code. Meaning, do these individuals feel that no line should be drawn or that the line or "bar" should be lowered?

You know what my point about all of this is? A question for those that are against the UPCI and what they stand for. Renda may want to move this to it's own thread.

We have been through our share of trouble, but being guided by the Lord, He says to stay and see it through, He will bring the victory. We have seen this happen.

Now, the question - What would those opposing the UPCI have us do? Walk away from the will of God or obey His direction - "Stay where you are and see it through"? With "standards" and other trappings that some disagree with and some things we are not in total agreement, He says to stay.

I think this is a very serious question and matter. For those, adamantly, pushing against the UPCI and it's leadership, it appears to me that they are interfering in people's lives and the direction God would have them walk.

It is my opinion that we are being perfected and must be very careful to walk through and not around situations, circumstances, trials, etc., that we face. We must always go to God and find direction.

It appears to me, from observation, that some are directing and counseling others to find their own direction and make their own decisions.

I believe that part of being perfected (maturing) is going through trials, learning, growing, etc. After all, "In patience, possess ye your souls."

We always know, "And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge; And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness; And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity. For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ."

And so, the question:

If God is telling me to stay where I am, how do I and how should I take those that oppose where I serve?

John Atkinson 01-20-2010 01:53 PM

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

Originally Posted by jasites (Post 867820)
Sorry, I just pulled some names that came to mind.

Question: Do the ones on here that disagree with the UPC's stance on holiness have any generalized agreement on dress code. Meaning, do these individuals feel that no line should be drawn or that the line or "bar" should be lowered?

I think everyone here believes in modesty, but even in the ranks of the UPCI standards vary so much from church to church that it seems that even they don't have a consistent agreement. This is because many of them are just pastoral whims, and UPC Pastor A and UPC Pastor B have different degrees of whimsicality.

As for the line drawn and the bar raised or lowered, that is as much a personal conviction issue with regards to a persons relationship with Jesus. Not a dictate from a pastor. We draw the line as we from the heart grow in grace.

Does that muzzle the preacher. Nope. There is a whole bible filled with biblical principles from cover to cover to preach from. We grow as learn to apply those principles and that covers a whole lot more than wardrobe.

God didn't give us his Spirit to lead and guide us if all we needed was another book of laws. Nor did he call and raise up the ministry as a law-making body. Anyone can line up to a dress code...muslims do it everyday.

My biggest issue with "standards" is how they are used to "Draw the line, set the bar" by people, often through misuse and misinterpretation of the Word, and then used to benchmark other believers and reject them based on externals. It foments an elitist mentality and attitude of "We got it and they don't". Something I believe the Lord finds abhorrent.

In passing let me mention Deuteronomy 22, as this was discussed. It isn't a buffet table where one can just grab the verse that seems to support their position, and discount the rest.

rgcraig 01-20-2010 01:59 PM

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

Originally Posted by John Atkinson (Post 867832)
I think everyone here believes in modesty, but even in the ranks of the UPCI standards vary so much from church to church that it seems that even they don't have a consistent agreement. This is because many of them are just pastoral whims, and UPC Pastor A and UPC Pastor B have different degrees of whimsicality.

As for the line drawn and the bar raised or lowered, that is as much a personal conviction issue with regards to a persons relationship with Jesus. Not a dictate from a pastor. We draw the line as we from the heart grow in grace.

Does that muzzle the preacher. Nope. There is a whole bible filled with biblical principles from cover to cover to preach from. We grow as learn to apply those principles and that covers a whole lot more than wardrobe.

God didn't give us his Spirit to lead and guide us if all we needed was another book of laws. Nor did he call and raise up the ministry as a law-making body. Anyone can line up to a dress code...muslims do it everyday.

My biggest issue with "standards" is how they are used to "Draw the line, set the bar" by people, often through misuse and misinterpretation of the Word, and then used to benchmark other believers and reject them based on externals. It foments an elitist mentality and attitude of "We got it and they don't". Something I believe the Lord finds abhorrent.

Specifically Deuteronomy 22, as this was discussed. It isn't a buffet table where one can just grab the verse that seems to support their position, and discount the rest.

Yea, I was going to stay this very thing.....lol! I wish I could have, but JA you are right on point!

Pressing-On 01-20-2010 02:00 PM

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

Originally Posted by John Atkinson (Post 867832)
I think everyone here believes in modesty, but even in the ranks of the UPCI standards vary so much from church to church that it seems that even they don't have a consistent agreement. This is because many of them are just pastoral whims, and UPC Pastor A and UPC Pastor B have different degrees of whimsicality.

That is probably true to some extent, but what I am seeing is that many are just going with their own convictions.

The women that don't have a problem with long hair or wearing a dress are dressing their personal convictions on those lines. I think MissBratt has said that as well.

One example would be that their hair is long, but they are trimming it. Simply because the scripture isn't clear enough on that. My Son-in-law sports a beard and is totally accepted. No one cares or thinks its unscriptural.

The thing is, I haven't seen some of the stances against many things, in the places that I have lived, for a very long time. I guess it's location, location, location.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:47 AM.

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