How Many "3 Steppers" Do We Have On Aff???

Originally Posted by Sheltiedad

What about before wing-tips were invented? Did someone at some point have to allow them as an exception? Obviously, they were not around during the time of the Apostles... and if so, who was this person and how did he get the authority to determine that wing-tips were okay?

Well, before wing tips came out ... any type of plain black dress shoe would have been acceptable. Wing tips are traditionally worn by a lot of preachers and church men.

Originally Posted by Caston Smith

Well, before wing tips came out ... any type of plain black dress shoe would have been acceptable. Wing tips are traditionally worn by a lot of preachers and church men.

But at some point, someone had to decide that wing-tips were okay right? Since they have not always been around....

By the way, my wing-tips look like the 2nd pair you posted... so I think I am okay? I do like the waxed shoe-strings, but it seems that that could be perceived as vain... should I just just plain cotton shoestrings?

Originally Posted by Sheltiedad

But at some point, someone had to decide that wing-tips were okay right? Since they have not always been around....

By the way, my wing-tips look like the 2nd pair you posted... so I think I am okay? I do like the waxed shoe-strings, but it seems that that could be perceived as vain... should I just just plain cotton shoestrings?

Yes, I would suggest plain cotton black shoe strings.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Caston Smith

Well, before wing tips came out ... any type of plain black dress shoe would have been acceptable. Wing tips are traditionally worn by a lot of preachers and church men.

So, the "traditions of men" is okay? For many of us it is traditional for men to refrain from shaving their faces smooth like a woman's face, or that of a little boy.

The Roman Catholic Church introduced the tradition of preachers shaving their faces smooth as a sign of submission to the Pope. When he rebelled against Rome, the first thing Martin Luther did was to grow a beard. Same with Calvin and thousands of others.

But today the Apostolics you fellowship and the Roman Catholic Church are the only fellowships that require their ministers to shave their faces smooth.

Why do you follow this Catholic tradition?

Originally Posted by pelathais

So, the "traditions of men" is okay? For many of us it is traditional for men to refrain from shaving their faces smooth like a woman's face, or that of a little boy.

The Roman Catholic Church introduced the tradition of preachers shaving their faces smooth as a sign of submission to the Pope. When he rebelled against Rome, the first thing Martin Luther did was to grow a beard. Same with Calvin and thousands of others.

But today the Apostolics you fellowship and the Roman Catholic Church are the only fellowships that require their ministers to shave their faces smooth.

Why do you follow this Catholic tradition?

II Thessalonians 2:15
Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

There's nothing wrong with traditions as long as they aren't sinful in nature. I believe we have picked up a lot of good things from different ones in church history.

John Wesley for instance ... he preached the message of Holiness and sanctification.

John Calvin-justification by faith. All though I do not adhere to the "alone" part of his teaching, because I believe if one has genuine faith it will produce works (i.e. repentance, water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins etc)

So as you can see there's nothing wrong with holding traditions that are not sinful in nature ...

Goodnight to you all. God bless!

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Caston Smith

II Thessalonians 2:15
Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

This refers to the traditions that the Apostles themselves taught during the 1st Century. They commanded no one anywhere to shave their faces smooth like a woman's as a condition of fellowship.

Originally Posted by Caston Smith

There's nothing wrong with traditions as long as they aren't sinful in nature.

The problem arises when traditions are introduced that actually run counter to the teachings of the NT or when they cause division within the body of Christ.

When I first came into the Apostolic movement as a teenager back in the late 1970's the thing that used be preached a lot was "give up the traditions of men..." Now that has changed. Used to be a lot of preaching against the whole idea of "traditions" in general. Now what we hear, even from some of the same voices, is that "traditions are okay..." What changed?

Originally Posted by Caston Smith

I believe we have picked up a lot of good things from different ones in church history.

And here you display wisdom, in my opinion. But we must remember that those things that we pick up are not to replace the Gospel message itself and should not be used to cause division within the body.

Originally Posted by Caston Smith

John Wesley for instance ... he preached the message of Holiness and sanctification.

John Calvin-justification by faith. All though I do not adhere to the "alone" part of his teaching, because I believe if one has genuine faith it will produce works (i.e. repentance, water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins etc)

So as you can see there's nothing wrong with holding traditions that are not sinful in nature ...

"Holiness and sanctification" and even Calvin's "justification" are not traditions, but rather are Biblical principles. We were talking about white shirts and unwaxed shoe laces.

But do we add to your list the Roman Catholic Church's teachings about the ministry shaving their faces smooth as a sign of submission to the Pope?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Caston Smith

II Thessalonians 2:15
Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

There's nothing wrong with traditions as long as they aren't sinful in nature. I believe we have picked up a lot of good things from different ones in church history.

John Wesley for instance ... he preached the message of Holiness and sanctification.

John Calvin-justification by faith. All though I do not adhere to the "alone" part of his teaching, because I believe if one has genuine faith it will produce works (i.e. repentance, water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins etc)

So as you can see there's nothing wrong with holding traditions that are not sinful in nature ...

The Traditions Paul was talking about was the Apostolic teaching, not extra biblical doctrines of men.