Isaiah 3 and jewelry...

[Godsdrummer]

Originally Posted by rdp

2 Cor. 7 tells us that we should have both inward & outward holiness...not one or the other! Try again Mike.

Outward holiness yes but not based on mans mistranslations of history and therefore scripture and mans traditions.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

Outward holiness yes but not based on mans mistranslations of history and therefore scripture and mans traditions.

"Mistranslations of history"??? Ever heard of the Bible? It says "N-O-T the WEARING of gold...."

Sheesh...what part of "not" are you having trouble with??

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by rdp

"Mistranslations of history"??? Ever heard of the Bible? It says "N-O-T the WEARING of gold...."

Sheesh...what part of "not" are you having trouble with??

In context...

1 Peter 3:3
Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;

According to your logic, should we also avoid wearing clothing?

[Sister Alvear]

Originally Posted by Aquila

In context...

1 Peter 3:3
Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;

According to your logic, should we also avoid wearing clothing?

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Aquila

In context...

1 Peter 3:3
Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;

According to your logic, should we also avoid wearing clothing?

Oh brother...here we go again! How many times have I explained the Greek in this passage??????? Simply will not waste my time repeating the same thing over & over, only for you fella's to plod along like you don't see it.

Ever heard of the "Neglected Aspect Fallacy"?? Obviously not......RDP.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by rdp

Oh brother...here we go again! How many times have I explained the Greek in this passage??????? Simply will not waste my time repeating the same thing over & over, only for you fella's to plod along like you don't see it.

Ever heard of the "Neglected Aspect Fallacy"?? Obviously not......RDP.

What's your experience with the Koine Greek? PhD from Southern Easter University? Along with LS?

You'll have a hair more luck with your egalitarian viewpoints than you will with your anti-jewlery prohibitions. Good luck finding scholarship that agrees with your expert Greek explanations. Spare us.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

What's your experience with the Koine Greek? PhD from Southern Easter University? Along with LS?

You'll have a hair more luck with your egalitarian viewpoints than you will with your anti-jewlery prohibitions. Good luck finding scholarship that agrees with your expert Greek explanations. Spare us.

Man you guys never cease to amaze me. This is exactly why I rarely even post on here anymore.

Ughhh, you'll find many scholarly quotes that agree w/ both of my positions, since I'm very careful to allow the text to define itself & do my research. Oughta' give it a try sometime Jeffrey! The Word is what will judge you in eternity after all.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by rdp

Man you guys never cease to amaze me. This is exactly why I rarely even post on here anymore.

Ughhh, you'll find many scholarly quotes that agree w/ both of my positions, since I'm very careful to allow the text to define itself & do my research. Oughta' give it a try sometime Jeffrey! The Word is what will judge you in eternity after all.

Prove it. State them. Show them.

I've spent considerable time in New Testament theology and haven't found a single scholar yet to view the two NT texts (which you've hijacked) as carte blanche prohibitions on jewelry. So please direct me to the right way.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by rdp

"Mistranslations of history"??? Ever heard of the Bible? It says "N-O-T the WEARING of gold...."

Sheesh...what part of "not" are you having trouble with??

If you'd get your head out of.... well, get your head out of yourself for a moment, read the full-length passage, understand the message that was being communicated and cease your arbitrary hyperliteralism for a moment, you'd understand that the "not" is a "this, not that" statement, which is a "for example."

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

If you'd get your head out of.... well, get your head out of yourself for a moment, read the full-length passage, understand the message that was being communicated and cease your arbitrary hyperliteralism for a moment, you'd understand that the "not" is a "this, not that" statement, which is a "for example."

Say what?? And I'M the one w/ my head where it doesn't belong?? Reeeeeeeeeeeal "Christian" language, by the way! I know, I know, refuse to look at yourself & attack me right?

Typical spirit of the liberal.........