Isaiah 3 and jewelry...

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by onefaith2

You have a paradox here. I am a person whom God shown to interpret as it is stated, not the other way around.

Please explain that statement. It sounds you like you are saying God has shown you how to interpret this passage. Is that what you are saying? If so, you are saying God showed you what you believe, implying anyone else's interpretation is wrong. What kind of discussion can anyone have with you if you believe God showed you how to interpret this? By default you make any conflicting ideas wrong.

True christian character is one that allows the liberty to wear jewelry and interpret Paul and Peter in favor of inward instead of outward adornment and HG conviction to be brainwashing?

This statement is not clear either. Are you saying that you believe it is correct to grant liberty to people to wear jewelry so long as they know inward is more important than outward? Your sentence seems to be missing a word or two, since it is hard to get your point.

[onefaith2]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Please explain that statement. It sounds you like you are saying God has shown you how to interpret this passage. Is that what you are saying? If so, you are saying God showed you what you believe, implying anyone else's interpretation is wrong. What kind of discussion can anyone have with you if you believe God showed you how to interpret this? By default you make any conflicting ideas wrong.
.

My response was to Godsdrummer that it takes God to show a person that jewelry is not wrong. I was responding it was God who convinced me that it is better not to wear jewelry. I'm saying I'm a paradox to him. He said God led him away from believing this way and I'm saying God led me to stay believing this way. Is that more clearer?

Originally Posted by mfblume

This statement is not clear either. Are you saying that you believe it is correct to grant liberty to people to wear jewelry so long as they know inward is more important than outward? Your sentence seems to be missing a word or two, since it is hard to get your point.

Again a response to Godsdrummer that until people are openhearted they will never see the truth about jewelry but will always believe the traditions they are taught. If I remember in other posts he has likened it to brainwashing. My response was so unless people give liberty to the outward in his view, they are brainwashed and that the conviction they say they have is not true conviction of God? It was a question. Again its really heard to articulate the meaning of a statement (at least for me) on a forum when you are talking to multiple people while responding to a single person on their post

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by onefaith2

My response was to Godsdrummer that it takes God to show a person that jewelry is not wrong. I was responding it was God who convinced me that it is better not to wear jewelry. I'm saying I'm a paradox to him. He said God led him away from believing this way and I'm saying God led me to stay believing this way. Is that more clearer?

Yes that is more clear. Thanks. My only advice is to remain open in case it was not God but tradition that made you mistake it for God. Just in case...

Again a response to Godsdrummer that until people are openhearted they will never see the truth about jewelry but will always believe the traditions they are taught.

Agreed. But by the same token you need to be open hearted just in case itr WAS tradition on your behalf and not God.

If I remember in other posts he has likened it to brainwashing. My response was so unless people give liberty to the outward in his view, they are brainwashed and that the conviction they say they have is not true conviction of God? It was a question. Again its really heard to articulate the meaning of a statement (at least for me) on a forum when you are talking to multiple people while responding to a single person on their post

I agree it is hard.