Cosmetics???

[TRFrance]

Originally Posted by LUKE2447

hmmm let's take a look at the early church fathers and see of they have anything to add to this it's okay to glorify the flesh. I don't think they supported in anyway what many here consider okay. Also it wasn't just one it was accross the board. Another point. Because something is common in the middle eastern culture has nothing to do with whether the church or Israel did it.

The opposite is also true:
I dont see where they condemned in any way what some here consider to be wrong.

But that's kind of a weak premise to begin with. I think our teachings should be based on what the bible says, not the early church fathers.

-----------
Luke, if we preach that something is sin, shouldnt we have biblical basis to do so? What biblical basis is there to preach agaisnt cosmetics? Please brother, give us what you think is the strongest scriptural reference on this.

[LUKE2447]

Originally Posted by TRFrance

The opposite is also true:
I dont see where they condemned in any way what some here consider to be wrong.

But that's kind of a weak premise to begin with. I think our teachings should be based on what the bible says, not the early church fathers.

-----------
Luke, if we preach that something is sin, shouldnt we have biblical basis to do so? What biblical basis is there to preach agaisnt cosmetics? Please brother, give us what you think is the strongest scriptural reference on this.

Glorifying the flesh is against biblical principle and something the early church fathers taught against concerning jewelry and makeup etc... If you do not realize what the early curch fathers said which is consistent across the board you need to examine again what they said. Envy is one of the natural sins of women and when they start glorifying their looks they become stumbling blocks for others as it takes hold like a virus and at that draw desire from men. That is not love! Same with men as well.

[Truthseeker]

Originally Posted by LUKE2447

Glorifying the flesh is against biblical principle and something the early church fathers taught against concerning jewelry and makeup etc... If you do not realize what the early curch fathers said which is consistent across the board you need to examine again what they said. Envy is one of the natural sins of women and when they start glorifying their looks they become stumbling blocks for others and at that draw desire from men. That is not love! Same with men as well.

A couple questions here:

Is there any scipture against makeup?

Does glorifying the flesh include pretty color clothes and hair dos as well?

Isn't colorful ties glorifying the flesh?

[LUKE2447]

Originally Posted by Truthseeker

A couple questions here:

Is there any scipture against makeup?

Does glorifying the flesh include pretty color clothes and hair dos as well?

Isn't colorful ties glorifying the flesh?

flawed arguments...

You are trying to justify the error of one because of common use of another. Thus I know X probably wears a tie so if he answers Y I got him in contradiction. Problem is you first need to justify the tie as necessary apparell and does it glorfiy the body uneedfully. Again read what the early church fathers said and you will be amazed that they make the UPC look like a harlot in some cases. What they taqught goes directly in line with the principles of the bible.

What is the point of changing and highlighting your appearance like most do?
Then you will probably answer with such a modest ...to look nice or some other mild answer without trying to show love for the desire of the flesh. My question would be, so a person cannot look nice without those things that highlight and draw more attention? They are used to elevate ones natural status. Then it spreads like wildfire women trying to keep status, to get or keep their men as they feel insufficient etc... She looks like.... and if I don't look like.... I lose.... or won't get...... Nothing but pride and envy of the flesh making others fail and nver thinking about love.

[TRFrance]

Originally Posted by LUKE2447

flawed arguments...

You are trying to justify the error of one because of common use of another. Thus I know X probably wears a tie so if he answers Y I got him in contradiction. Problem is you first need to justify the tie as necessary apparell and does it glorfiy the body uneedfully. Again read what the early church fathers said and you will be amazed that they make the UPC look like a harlot in some cases. What they taqught goes directly in line with the principles of the bible.

PO's arguments are not flawed, they are solid... and I believe you know that if you answered those questions in a straightforward manner, it would reveal some inconsistencies in your own argument.

You know you have no scriptures on this, so you're relying on your own reasoning, and appealing to the "church fathers". Just give us 2 solid scriptures and that will be enough.

Originally Posted by LUKE2447

Yes she has many enticements and glorifying her flesh to draw attention isa huge one in which she or he draws forth the passion of others.

The uses of cosmetics was a common practice in biblical times, and was also practiced by the women of Israel. God, through his prophets, condemned the Israelites for many sins, and spelled out many of those sins specifically. Did he ever say anything against their use of adornments or cosmetics? (And if not, have you considered that it didnt matter to him as much as it seems to matter to you?)

[coadie]

Originally Posted by TRFrance

The uses of cosmetics was a common practice in biblical times, and was also practiced by the women of Israel. God, through his prophets, condemned the Israelites for many sins, and spelled out many of those sins specifically. Did he ever say anything against their use of adornments or cosmetics? (And if not, have you considered that it didnt matter to him as much as it seems to matter to you?)

No scripture? You just broke my irony meter. You don't want scripture. You want us to believe it because of your assumptions.

Pride....the haughty naughty look

You need to study the bible. The gospels discussed Jewish women. No reference to paint. Kosmos was greek and it seems Hebrew doesn't even have a word for makeup. Of course you are so frustrated and can't even tell us the bible translators 1611 had a word for makeup.

Go ahead and makeup scripture on makeup.

Cosmopolitan magazine is for the people that need cosmetics.

http://www.cosmopolitan.com/

Walker, Barbara G. Women's Encyclopedia Of Myths And Secrets. HarperCollins Publishers, New York, New York, 1983. This book offers wonderful insights into mythology and history with respect to the role of women and goddesses. An excellent telling of herstory.


The NAS Old Testament Hebrew Lexicon

Strong's Number: 8562 Browse Lexicon
Original Word Word Origin
qwrmt from (04838)
Transliterated Word TDNT Entry
Tamruwq TWOT - 1246b
Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech
tam-rook' Noun Masculine

Definition
a scraping, rubbing (CLBL) remedy (for an injury)

NAS Word Usage - Total: 3
cosmetics 3
NAS Verse Count
Esther 3

so the closest word is purification, cleansing scrubbing. We see references to polish and fragrances.

Looks like the PAINT department is Egyptian.

It seems our worldy people are insecure in their own skin. self image issues.

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by coadie

No scripture? You just broke my irony meter. You don't want scripture. You want us to believe it because of your assumptions.

Pride....the haughty naughty look

You need to study the bible. The gospels discussed Jewish women. No reference to paint. Kosmos was greek and it seems Hebrew doesn't even have a word for makeup. Of course you are so frustrated and can't even tell us the bible translators 1611 had a word for makeup.

Go ahead and makeup scripture on makeup.

Cosmopolitan magazine is for the people that need cosmetics.

http://www.cosmopolitan.com/

Walker, Barbara G. Women's Encyclopedia Of Myths And Secrets. HarperCollins Publishers, New York, New York, 1983. This book offers wonderful insights into mythology and history with respect to the role of women and goddesses. An excellent telling of herstory.


The NAS Old Testament Hebrew Lexicon

Strong's Number: 8562 Browse Lexicon
Original Word Word Origin
qwrmt from (04838)
Transliterated Word TDNT Entry
Tamruwq TWOT - 1246b
Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech
tam-rook' Noun Masculine

Definition
a scraping, rubbing (CLBL) remedy (for an injury)

NAS Word Usage - Total: 3
cosmetics 3
NAS Verse Count
Esther 3

so the closest word is purification, cleansing scrubbing. We see references to polish and fragrances.

Looks like the PAINT department is Egyptian.

It seems our worldy people are insecure in their own skin. self image issues.

Darlin' I think YOU are the one missing the point.

WIPE off that PROUD look!!!!! Any scripture you have quoted has been about that.

Maybe you need to stick to discussing abortions and economics.

[TRFrance]

Originally Posted by coadie

No scripture? You just broke my irony meter. You don't want scripture. You want us to believe it because of your assumptions.

The scriptures I would post have already been mentioned by others elsewhere in this thread. I suggest you go back and take a good look.

Originally Posted by coadie

You need to study the bible.

Wow. That's really ironic coming from you.

The flawed type of approach to biblical analysis that you embrace is part of the reason why so many unbiblical and unsound teachings have taken root in too many Apostolic churches.

You dont impress me as one who knows how to rightly divide the word. I'll just leave it at that.

[Truthseeker]

Originally Posted by LUKE2447

flawed arguments...

You are trying to justify the error of one because of common use of another. Thus I know X probably wears a tie so if he answers Y I got him in contradiction. Problem is you first need to justify the tie as necessary apparell and does it glorfiy the body uneedfully. Again read what the early church fathers said and you will be amazed that they make the UPC look like a harlot in some cases. What they taqught goes directly in line with the principles of the bible.

What is the point of changing and highlighting your appearance like most do?
Then you will probably answer with such a modest ...to look nice or some other mild answer without trying to show love for the desire of the flesh. My question would be, so a person cannot look nice without those things that highlight and draw more attention? They are used to elevate ones natural status. Then it spreads like wildfire women trying to keep status, to get or keep their men as they feel insufficient etc... She looks like.... and if I don't look like.... I lose.... or won't get...... Nothing but pride and envy of the flesh making others fail and nver thinking about love.

OK Give scripture against makeup.

I understand we against adorning the flesh with makeup and jewelry but clothes gets a free pass. I call it selective adornment.

Many of the early holiness pioneer FATHERS preached against wearing red and some even preached wearing only white or black. You know, anything else is just beautifying/glorifying the flesh. How dare us go against them pioneer that fathered our movement.

The million dollar question is what the scriptures say about makeup and that is what I'm interested in seeing. It's ok if you say your againts makeup even though there's no scripture against it. There are things I won't do even though it's not written in scripture, but some are acting like having a lobectomy to say there's no scripture against it.

[RandyWayne]

Originally Posted by Truthseeker

A couple questions here:

Is there any scipture against makeup?

Does glorifying the flesh include pretty color clothes and hair dos as well?

Isn't colorful ties glorifying the flesh?

....or making sure your cloths are ironed/wrinkle free (relatively)

....or that your hair is combed

....or that your yard is mowed

...car washed and cleaned inside

..house painted

..windows cleaned

The list is endless.