If you have to wear make-up to be accepted....

[KeptByTheWord]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

I hope this was tongue-in-cheek.

There is a MASSIVE difference between the camouflage used by a soldier so that he doesn't get his skull blown out by a sniper, and a person daintily decorating him or herself to look pretty.

I think you're determined to miss the point here. It was not tongue in cheek. Men paint themselves for war, always have. Women dress nice and pretty, because it is what they do and who they are, and always have done. If men apply war paint because they are going to war, or hunting, there is nothing wrong with their objective. If, however, they are applying makeup to look like a woman, then that is a problem. If a woman applies makeup much as she would other adornments to compliment her attire, and desires to look attractive and presentable, because that is what women do... there is nothing wrong with that. If however, that makeup is applied in order to attract attention, and cause men to desire her sexually, then this is a problem.

You spoke of pride being the only reason that a woman would want to wear makeup... well, let me ask you this... do you just go au' natural? No deodorant, hairspray, cologne? Don't even bother to shave, just let the beard grow? Do you wear a tie, belt, cuff links, or fancy boots? How about that suit? Is there pride involved in wearing or not wearing any of those things? Or do you wear those things to look nice, and presentable?

You see... pride comes in many different forms and avenues. Maybe you don't wear a ring on your finger, but maybe there is an element of pride in your heart because you wear a nice suit to church every Sunday, or drive a fancier car than the family who sits next to you in church. I have no idea and I'm not even going to try to guess what might cause pride in your heart. That is between you and the Lord.

But to use a blanket statement to say that wearing makeup is a source of pride has me shaking my head... especially when men put things on their bodies, just as women do, to be presentable.

Certainly makeup CAN be a source of pride... but to just broad-brush, and say every woman who puts on a bit of mascara has pride... would be like saying that every man who shaves his face has pride too...

You see, if we tried to take away every single thing that "could" be a source of pride, we might as well go live like hermits somewhere, because I guarantee that there is something you own, something you do, or something you love that "can" be a source of pride... but only the Lord God himself and you know what that thing might be.

We certainly do need to be on guard against pride, but we must be careful to not just broadbrush every single thing that "could" cause pride... and say that it does. Each one of us must answer to the Lord for ourselves, and what may cause pride in my life, may not even affect yours.

In fact, ILG described the difference between a principle and the application of the principle above perfectly, and is exactly how I view the issue as well.

Preach the principle, and allow the spirit of the Lord to enable the application.

[KeptByTheWord]

Bro. EB: ... I won't quote your entire post, but don't you think that teaching people to allow the spirit of the Lord to lead and guide them and teach them to do or not to do things, and being sensitive to the spirit of the Lord would be the best way to root out the issues of pride, and sin in hearts?

Do you think that rules need to be taught, or is there a better way to do it, which might be reinforcing the principle at hand, instead of the application? What has been your experience?

[ILG]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

And this is how I see it as well. Principles, not application, should be the topic that is addressed. You expressed the differences very well, ILG!

Thanks KBTW!

[ILG]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Touche!

Wonderful post!

Bravo!

I have always taught that "who you are in the dark is really who you are."

Teaching you shouldn't own a television, or never have a computer which has Internet access, isn't as bad as a person's mind going places where if the people around them knew what was on their minds they would be horrified.

Israel were champions of being able to feign living for God with an uncircumcised heart. True legalism isn't a brother who love long sleeves or a sister who loves wearing her head covering bonnet, but those who come to church with false piety and praise the Lord, then go back home to beat their kids, wife, and cat.

Sometimes good citizens ponder in their hearts what serial killers act out in real life.

Bob Coy at Calvary Chapel in Fort Lauderdale built a church from a small group to 20,000 people, but he was looking at internet porn, and having relations with the women of his congregation.

Now, he didn't teach against television, internet, beards, hairstyles, jewelry, pagan holidays, but for whatever reason he lost sight of principles and no longer had rules for himself. He not only betrayed his wife, and children, but himself.

Yet, every religion has principles which become rules, like not looking at pornography.

You don't get up behind the pulpit (unless moved by Jesus Christ) and tell everyone in a congregation that they shouldn't be downloading porn, or operating a porn website while you're being a "keeper of the home."

These things don't have to be agreed upon in Churchdom because its supposed to be against our religion?

Right?

If Ted and Fred come to church and want to live for God, but also want to stay cozed up together on the first pew, MOST people in the Church of the Run of the Mill would have issue with that, but where's the written RULE?

Issues of modesty didn't come out of thin air, nor did television issues come out of thin air, but those who first put the television issue on the books would be puking their guts up if they saw preachers on the Internet, why because internet makes television look like its heaven sent. Still if asked why you wouldn't go to certain places on the web, you would reply because you don't do that. Someone outside of your religion would call that a rule.

Principles are what I was taught by my atheist father, and my agnostic mother. They weren't swinging a Bible, my mom wasn't dressed like Emma, but they taught principles that would be considered conservative.

Any rule is a joke when the heart isn't right, even an offering given to the church is tainted if not given freely and with a cheerful mind to give it. We are taught to love those who hate us, forgive those who kill us, and to lay down our lives for our brothers. Yet, this isn't a condition of only Apostolic One God movement, but it is churches all over the place. Principles have been watered down, rules caused by principles are feigned, and the world is watching this country speed towards post Churchism like her Western European sister.

Principles inevitably cause rules, like don't download porn or Ted should not want to marry Fred. But if the principles are skewed then the rules are no longer there. Anyone claiming they follow the rules become a fig tree which bares no fruit, which is cursed not by man, but by Christ.

You can take a killer, dress him up, send him to rehabilitation school, and he will still kill the teacher. Washing a pig doesn't change the pig's mind, and giving pearls to a dog doesn't change the dog's mind. giving a list of rules with no principles behind those rules is just a formula for disaster.

I think principles cause personal and family rules, but church rules are a different breed that keep sin covered in the camp, by rule followers who don't have a circumcised heart.

Anyway, we see things much closer than it would appear from the outside looking in!

[ILG]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Do it.

One of these days, I will try it again and see if I can make it happen.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by ILG

I think principles cause personal and family rules, but church rules are a different breed that keep sin covered in the camp, by rule followers who don't have a circumcised heart.

Anyway, we see things much closer than it would appear from the outside looking in!

Yet, all religions have rules caused by the religious teaching within that religion. Now I brought up the case of Bob Coy who was the pastor of Calvary Chapel Fort Lauderdale, maybe I can understand your sentence (which I placed in bold red), if you can explain which church rule did Bob Coy hide in to protect his porn and adultery?

Also allow me also to ask, what rules are in mainstream generic Churchanity which cover sin in the camp?

If you walk into the Church of the Immaculate Vanilla where there are no standards of dress, attire, and everyone is always reminded that they're always sinners, and will always sin no matter what, isn't sin no longer an issue?

Therefore why would it be hidden?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by ILG

One of these days, I will try it again and see if I can make it happen.

Get some help, I believe there are enough computer experts on this forum to walk you through it.

[SiblingRevelry]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

This man walks into your assembly, professing himself to be a believer:



This woman walks into your assembly, professing herself to be a believer:



Shorter hair, tasteful jewelry, nicely applied make-up, wearing women's clothing.

She wants to join your church, perhaps get involved in ministry someday.

Does she have to change?

If yes, why?

If not, why not?

Scriptural answers only, no hypocrisy.

I'm curious to hear the answer to this one. Because my hair is this short. As for the jewelry and makeup, I don't wear them.

The real life answer for me is that I know I will not be asked to take any position in the fellowship I attend and it is due not only to the shortness of the hair but the fact that I keep it short for health reasons, but they're happy to get my offerings.

[SiblingRevelry]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

I agree quite completely that the Bible commands a gender distinction, both biologically, but also culturally in dress and appearance, and etc.

The problem with this statement is that biologically, some people present as both genders in their external biology. Some people may have external biology that doesn't match up with their genetics. And some people were operated on as babies because their external biology was decided by a doctor because the child didn't obviously present as male or female. This is not a rare occurrence; it's a daily thing.

Insisting on a "gender distinction" when biology itself doesn't do so is problematic to me.

[ILG]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Yet, all religions have rules caused by the religious teaching within that religion. Now I brought up the case of Bob Coy who was the pastor of Calvary Chapel Fort Lauderdale, maybe I can understand your sentence (which I placed in bold red), if you can explain which church rule did Bob Coy hide in to protect his porn and adultery?

Also allow me also to ask, what rules are in mainstream generic Churchanity which cover sin in the camp?

If you walk into the Church of the Immaculate Vanilla where there are no standards of dress, attire, and everyone is always reminded that they're always sinners, and will always sin no matter what, isn't sin no longer an issue?

Therefore why would it be hidden?

You raise up some good points and I don't have the answers for all of them. (However, I do know that affairs and stuff like that are not tolerated in mainstream churches. It's not anything goes.) But I have tried the conservative route and I know rules do not work to keep sin out of the camp. Rather, it seems to keep it hidden.