Isaiah 3 and jewelry...

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by rdp

Point being God also created mankind, who later fell into gross immorality. "And it repented God that he made man."

It's been fun........Shalom!

A man with your logic should not accuse others of logical fallacies. It's a fallacy in itself! lol

Created who LATER fell. Your point? To say all about mankind was evil because he later fell is a FALLACY.

To say what God created was flawed because he LATER failed is a FALLACY.

In fact, out of all your arguments on this subject, this is the most entertaining.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

A man with your logic should not accuse others of logical fallacies. It's a fallacy in itself! lol

Created who LATER fell. Your point? To say all about mankind was evil because he later fell is a FALLACY.

To say what God created was flawed because he LATER failed is a FALLACY.

In fact, out of all your arguments on this subject, this is the most entertaining.

Speaking of "entertaining," you show your typical ignorance here by not comprehending that I was pointing out that God also created mankind, who sinned.

So, according to the liberal agenda/logic, we should also partake of man's sins because God is the One who created humanity? God put jewels on Lucifer, which later has a "Not with gold, pearls,..." tied to it. God created humanity, who later sinned. You partake of the former [in the face of clear instructions otherwise], & yet reject the latter...then wanna' talk to ME about "fallacies" ???????????????

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by rdp

Speaking of "entertaining," you show your typical ignorance here by not comprehending that I was pointing out that God also created mankind, who sinned.

So, according to the liberal agenda/logic, we should also partake of man's sins because God is the One who created humanity? God put jewels on Lucifer, which later has a "Not with gold, pearls,..." tied to it. God created humanity, who later sinned. You partake of the former [in the face of clear instructions otherwise], & yet reject the latter...then wanna' talk to ME about "fallacies" ???????????????

You make no sense, RDP!

Our very point was that there is no textual proof to suggest Lucifer's jewels were a violation against God. It is said in a rather complimentarian way, including the description of musical abilities and glory. God creating man who LATER sinned is completely irrevelant. You're trying to stretch an Oprah-sized point onto a Leonardo DiCaprio body

Interpreting Ezekiel has nothing to do with taking the argument back to Timothy or Peter. Ezekiel wrote independently of them (and as you know, we've spent considerable time arguing a contrary position to yours on those references as well). You tried to pot shot this point in a drive-by, shoot-from-the-hip fashion, so let's stick to the Ezekiel passagem (one of many scriptures I listed where jewelry was spoken of positively).

You almost assume Lucifer was in sin when he was described by Ezekiel. Of course, you MUST stretch that point to conform to your later point (I believe you understand the word "eisegesis"). Unfortunately, your case is without any merit.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

You make no sense, RDP!

Ad Hominem attacks do not serve as "evidence." Moving right along.....

Our very point was that there is no textual proof to suggest Lucifer's jewels were a violation against God. It is said in a rather complimentarian way, including the description of musical abilities and glory. God creating man who LATER sinned is completely irrevelant. You're trying to stretch an Oprah-sized point onto a Leonardo DiCaprio body

Sorry Charlie, there certainly is textual proof that Lucifer's ornaments played a part in his fall...why else did the Holy Spirit take the time to enumerate them in describing his fall. Musical abilities are not condemned else where in the Bible as is Jewelry on God's people. Try again Jeffrey.....

Interpreting Ezekiel has nothing to do with taking the argument back to Timothy or Peter.

Hmmm, then why has a majority of this thread included a discussion of Ezek. 16?????? Man, you're toooooo easy!


Ezekiel wrote independently of them (and as you know, we've spent considerable time arguing a contrary position to yours on those references as well). You tried to pot shot this point in a drive-by, shoot-from-the-hip fashion, so let's stick to the Ezekiel passagem (one of many scriptures I listed where jewelry was spoken of positively).

And fine linen, nose rings, etc. were also mentioned "positively," so I suppose that I can head down to the most extravagant, costly suit shop in town & now spend &1,000 on suit for church, along w/ my nose ring, lip ring, tongue ring, spiked hair, etc.....Plumb ridiculous!

You almost assume Lucifer was in sin when he was described by Ezekiel. Of course, you MUST stretch that point to conform to your later point (I believe you understand the word "eisegesis"). Unfortunately, your case is without any merit.

"Not with gold jewelry, pearls, or costly apparel." [NLT]. Sorry friend, denial is not evidence. I have all "the merit" in the world...it's called the Bible. You oughta' check it out sometime......

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by rdp

"Not with gold jewelry, pearls, or costly apparel." [NLT]. Sorry friend, denial is not evidence. I have all "the merit" in the world...it's called the Bible. You oughta' check it out sometime......

Well there you have it. Your just wasting my time. I can only understand your great wisdom when I'm spiritual like you. And all this time I thought the Emperor was really naked! DOH!

Our very point was that there is no textual proof to suggest Lucifer's jewels were a violation against God. It is said in a rather complimentarian way, including the description of musical abilities and glory. God creating man who LATER sinned is completely irrevelant. You're trying to stretch an Oprah-sized point onto a Leonardo DiCaprio body

Sorry Charlie, there certainly is textual proof that Lucifer's ornaments played a part in his fall...why else did the Holy Spirit take the time to enumerate them in describing his fall. Musical abilities are not condemned else where in the Bible as is Jewelry on God's people. Try again Jeffrey.....

[B]You were in Eden,
the garden of God;
every precious stone adorned you:
ruby, topaz and emerald,
chrysolite, onyx and jasper,
sapphire, turquoise and beryl. [c]
Your settings and mountings [d] were made of gold;
on the day you were created they were prepared.

14 You were anointed as a guardian cherub,
for so I ordained you.
You were on the holy mount of God;
you walked among the fiery stones.

15 You were blameless in your ways
from the day you were created
till wickedness was found in you.

16 Through your widespread trade
you were filled with violence,
and you sinned.
So I drove you in disgrace from the mount of God,
and I expelled you, O guardian cherub,
from among the fiery stones.

17 Your heart became proud
on account of your beauty,
and you corrupted your wisdom
because of your splendor.
So I threw you to the earth;
I made a spectacle of you before kings.

There is nowhere in this passage even a HINT or SUGGESTION that jewelry was "part of Lucifer's fall." Nor was this a description of his fall (portions do in later vv 17-19, which describes pride). Or perhaps your thinking of the description in Isaiah 14:12-15, which again describes his sin, but nothing in there about jewelry.

Ezekiel 28 was one of MANY scriptures were jewelry is spoken of positively.

[Michael]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

Well there you have it. Your just wasting my time. I can only understand your great wisdom when I'm spiritual like you. And all this time I thought the Emperor was really naked! DOH!



[B]You were in Eden,
the garden of God;
every precious stone adorned you:
ruby, topaz and emerald,
chrysolite, onyx and jasper,
sapphire, turquoise and beryl. [c]
Your settings and mountings [d] were made of gold;
on the day you were created they were prepared.

14 You were anointed as a guardian cherub,
for so I ordained you.
You were on the holy mount of God;
you walked among the fiery stones.

15 You were blameless in your ways
from the day you were created
till wickedness was found in you.

16 Through your widespread trade
you were filled with violence,
and you sinned.
So I drove you in disgrace from the mount of God,
and I expelled you, O guardian cherub,
from among the fiery stones.

17 Your heart became proud
on account of your beauty,
and you corrupted your wisdom
because of your splendor.
So I threw you to the earth;
I made a spectacle of you before kings.

There is nowhere in this passage even a HINT or SUGGESTION that jewelry was "part of Lucifer's fall." Nor was this a description of his fall (portions do in later vv 17-19, which describes pride). Or perhaps your thinking of the description in Isaiah 14:12-15, which again describes his sin, but nothing in there about jewelry.

Ezekiel 28 was one of MANY scriptures were jewelry is spoken of positively.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

Well there you have it. Your just wasting my time. I can only understand your great wisdom when I'm spiritual like you. And all this time I thought the Emperor was really naked! DOH!



[B]You were in Eden,
the garden of God;
every precious stone adorned you:
ruby, topaz and emerald,
chrysolite, onyx and jasper,
sapphire, turquoise and beryl. [c]
Your settings and mountings [d] were made of gold;
on the day you were created they were prepared.

14 You were anointed as a guardian cherub,
for so I ordained you.
You were on the holy mount of God;
you walked among the fiery stones.

15 You were blameless in your ways
from the day you were created
till wickedness was found in you.

16 Through your widespread trade
you were filled with violence,
and you sinned.
So I drove you in disgrace from the mount of God,
and I expelled you, O guardian cherub,
from among the fiery stones.

17 Your heart became proud
on account of your beauty,
and you corrupted your wisdom
because of your splendor.
So I threw you to the earth;
I made a spectacle of you before kings.

There is nowhere in this passage even a HINT or SUGGESTION that jewelry was "part of Lucifer's fall." Nor was this a description of his fall (portions do in later vv 17-19, which describes pride). Or perhaps your thinking of the description in Isaiah 14:12-15, which again describes his sin, but nothing in there about jewelry.

Ezekiel 28 was one of MANY scriptures were jewelry is spoken of positively.

No, the emperor is not naked, since the Bible says to be clothed in modest apparel! Let me guess, that doesn't mean what it says either right Jeffrey???

I contend that the jewelry is mentioned in connection w/ his fall. But, since you fella's want to appeal to Lucifer [which is ridiculous], does this mean that a child of God can be "covered in every precious stone," including the diamond, beryl, onyx, jasper, sapphire, etc.? So, can I justifiably get in the pulpit decked from head to toe in diamonds, nose rings, tongue rings, lip rings, earrings, w/ a $1000 suit & then teach people about modesty/godliness?

Jeffrey, you guys are ridiculous....repent & believe the Bible: "Not with braided hair, gold jewelry, pearls, or costly apparel [NLT, NIV, HCSB]. Man, can you guys not read??????