Isaiah 3 and jewelry...

Justin · #1 10-05-2010, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rdp

I explained the difference in gold rings & shabby clothes a few posts ago to you. Go back & reread it. Will not sit here & just repeat everything. Regardless, the man w/ "gold rings" was still "coming in"...not already in!

Regardless, the man w/ "shabby clothes" was still "coming in"...not already in!

Jeffrey · #2 10-05-2010, 11:22 AM

What in God's name are you two doing to the Text? lol

It's not made of spandex, quit stretching it to make a point that it's not written to make!

The man was in , the man was coming in, therefore that means... oh give me a break.

Justin · #3 10-05-2010, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

What in God's name are you two doing to the Text? lol

It's not made of spandex, quit stretching it to make a point that it's not written to make!

The man was in , the man was coming in, therefore that means... oh give me a break.

I know. I have no idea where he is going with the man and the ring being the outsider "coming in". They were both outsiders "coming in" He doesn't see that I guess.

rdp · #4 10-26-2010, 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Justin

I know. I have no idea where he is going with the man and the ring being the outsider "coming in". They were both outsiders "coming in" He doesn't see that I guess.

Why am I not surprised that you 2 would agree??? What YOU "don't see" is that the man w/ the gold ring, as well as the man w/ vile clothing, were both O-U-T-S-I-D-E of the Ekklessia...not w/in! Let me help you out here: This means that people w/in the church did not wear either!

So sad how you fella's fight the text......seriously.

Justin · #5 10-26-2010, 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rdp

Why am I not surprised that you 2 would agree??? What YOU "don't see" is that the man w/ the gold ring, as well as the man w/ vile clothing, were both O-U-T-S-I-D-E of the Ekklessia...not w/in! Let me help you out here: This means that people w/in the church did not wear either!

So sad how you fella's fight the text......seriously.

I truly do not understand your logic. How you do gather that people in the church did not wear rings? Just because someone who wore them came in to the church?

If this is what you believe, you are clearly missing the context.

Godsdrummer · #6 10-27-2010, 07:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Justin

I truly do not understand your logic. How you do gather that people in the church did not wear rings? Just because someone who wore them came in to the church?

If this is what you believe, you are clearly missing the context.

It is very simple realy, they simbolize anything that does not back up thier point, try to make the greek meaning back up what the context of scripture does not say.

Example: I heard a pastor once preach against facial hair. Now I knew there were those that preached against it but could not see where they could possibly get this teaching from.

This pastor used the passage that "says it is a shame for a man to prophecy with his head covered" and followed that up with the statement that the face is part of the head there for should not be covered.

Oh well you can lead a horse to water.....

MissBrattified · #7 10-27-2010, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

It is very simple realy, they simbolize anything that does not back up thier point, try to make the greek meaning back up what the context of scripture does not say.

Example: I heard a pastor once preach against facial hair. Now I knew there were those that preached against it but could not see where they could possibly get this teaching from.

This pastor used the passage that "says it is a shame for a man to prophecy with his head covered" and followed that up with the statement that the face is part of the head there for should not be covered.

Oh well you can lead a horse to water.....

This is very bad news for all the women whose whole *heads* must then be covered .

rdp · #8 10-28-2010, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

It is very simple realy, they simbolize anything that does not back up thier point, try to make the greek meaning back up what the context of scripture does not say.

Example: I heard a pastor once preach against facial hair. Now I knew there were those that preached against it but could not see where they could possibly get this teaching from.

This pastor used the passage that "says it is a shame for a man to prophecy with his head covered" and followed that up with the statement that the face is part of the head there for should not be covered.

Oh well you can lead a horse to water.....

Yes....anything to make the Word of God of no effect! You fella's just never will get it...sad, very sad.

mfblume · #9 10-28-2010, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

I heard a pastor once preach against facial hair. Now I knew there were those that preached against it but could not see where they could possibly get this teaching from.

This pastor used the passage that "says it is a shame for a man to prophecy with his head covered" and followed that up with the statement that the face is part of the head there for should not be covered.

Oh well you can lead a horse to water.....

Aha!!! THAT is why they plucked the beard from Jesus' face on His way to the cross! Now I get it! They were straightening Him up!

rdp · #10 10-28-2010, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Justin

I truly do not understand your logic. How you do gather that people in the church did not wear rings? Just because someone who wore them came in to the church?

If this is what you believe, you are clearly missing the context.

Assertions do not serve as evidence; the textual fact remains that the one's w/ the gold ring & vile clothing are depicted as outsiders...not insiders. YOU are the one missing the "context".