Cosmetics???

[tbpew]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

Surely, you do not deny this?????

rg,
this conversation has gone so juvenile that I am at best a curiousity seeker here.

If there are no principles, of course everything is conditional.

But individuals live by principles.
I do not have to impose any specific outward conduct choice on anyone else, and I do NOT impose such.

When considering scripture as a source of life's choices, life's principles, and then have that perspective mocked as being some 'round the corner means' to insert my UC standards, THAT's just CRAZY TALK.

I pronounce TS the supreme winner and 'bringer of lilght" concerning his heralded position that God must be absolutely indifferent about cosmetic use applied to the face or body of his creation because there is not one scripture that God included that said, "I am against those who apply cosmetics".

[dizzyde]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

This is hilarious!

You are accusing someone else of not being able to defend their position and not staying on topic?????

Seriously. Mr. Pot, meet Mr. Kettle.

[*AQuietPlace*]

Originally Posted by coadie

You are still struggling with the need to wear paint. I know why the world installs paint and I know women that leave the church start wearing paint. No one wants to let me know why they can't submit their need to be painted to the Lord.

Yep, TR needs to get over his desire to wear paint!!

[TRFrance]

Originally Posted by coadie

Are you afraid to discuss cosmetics?

so you are unable to discuss cosmetics as a stand alone topic?

If you were for real, the position could be discussed and defended on it's own merits.

You are still struggling with the need to wear paint. I know why the world installs paint and I know women that leave the church start wearing paint. No one wants to let me know why they can't submit their need to be painted to the Lord.

I have never spoken of a "need to wear paint". That's a false argument and you know it full well.

You're the one struggling here. I'm not afraid to discuss the cosmetics issue with you. In fact, I was one who first asked you for your scriptural basis on this , and you've been dancing ever since. You've given us "reasons" based on history, psychology, human logic, etc, but I havent seen a shred of scripture from you on this.

Apparently, somebody must have stolen your bible. When they bring it back, feel free to find those scriptures for us and show us those verses.

Blessings to you.

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by tbpew

rg,
this conversation has gone so juvenile that I am at best a curiousity seeker here.

If there are no principles, of course everything is conditional.

But individuals live by principles.
I do not have to impose any specific outward conduct choice on anyone else, and I do NOT impose such.
When considering scripture as a source of life's choices, life's principles, and then have that perspective mocked as being some 'round the corner means' to insert my UC standards, THAT's just CRAZY TALK. Agree!

I pronounce TS the supreme winner and 'bringer of lilght" concerning his heralded position that God must be absolutely indifferent about cosmetic use applied to the face or body of his creation because their is not one scripture that God included that said, "I am against those who apply cosmetics".

I'm not sure that's what TS is doing. BUT....I do know that coadie was saying there IS scripture condoning it and he's yet to post it.

I agree!

I thought you were denying the first part of his post - -

"On the flip side, men are pressured to look a certain way too. Like our conferences look like senate in session.

Where do we get clean shaved, colored shirts and suits from? Why have ties gotten longer over the years and why are the brothers wearing them? "

[Truthseeker]

Originally Posted by tbpew

rg,
this conversation has gone so juvenile that I am at best a curiousity seeker here.

If there are no principles, of course everything is conditional.

But individuals live by principles.
I do not have to impose any specific outward conduct choice on anyone else, and I do NOT impose such.

When considering scripture as a source of life's choices, life's principles, and then have that perspective mocked as being some 'round the corner means' to insert my UC standards, THAT's just CRAZY TALK.

I pronounce TS the supreme winner and 'bringer of lilght" concerning his heralded position that God must be absolutely indifferent about cosmetic use applied to the face or body of his creation because their is not one scripture that God included that said, "I am against those who apply cosmetics".

All I wanted was someone to give scripture against it, I take it you don't have any to give. I'm not "bringer of light" but wanted input on the subject.
If you go back You will see I asked questions in defense of the no makeup position when first posting with TRFrance. I'm interested in both sides input in regards to what the scripture says.

[Truthseeker]

Coadie

Can you give scripture against cosmetics?

[TRFrance]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

It's called guilt by association.

Pagans worshiped on Sunday...Pagans worshiped on just about every day of the week

Aah... yes. I havent heard that one for a while.

A standard argument for the Seventh Day Adventists, etc.

I'm assuming Coadie and his other buddies here worship on Sunday. I wonder if they know that there are Sabbatarian Apostolics who will make the argument that they are following a pagan practice if they worship on Sunday?

[coadie]

Originally Posted by Sherri

No, I always envied those Pentecostal girls who could just pull their hair straight back and wear no makeup and still look gorgeous!!! I just couldn't pull off that look and still can't!

12Now when every maid's turn was come to go in to king Ahasuerus, after that she had been twelve months, according to the manner of the women, (for so were the days of their purifications accomplished, to wit, six months with oil of myrrh, and six months with sweet odours, and with other things for the purifying of the women

13Then thus came every maiden unto the king; whatsoever she desired was given her to go with her out of the house of the women unto the king's house.

All they talk about with Esther is purify and clean. smell great. This was obviously not a Jewish program.

The painting is from the Egyptian cultic practices.

I have been a little lax in letting the paint and coating folks get by without scriptureal support for painting like the egyptians.

[tbpew]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

I agree!

I thought you were denying the first part of his post - -

"On the flip side, men are pressured to look a certain way too. Like our conferences look like senate in session.

Where do we get clean shaved, colored shirts and suits from? Why have ties gotten longer over the years and why are the brothers wearing them? "


I'm not sure that's what TS is doing. BUT....I do know that coadie was saying there IS scripture condoning it and he's yet to post it.

we get these influences from the present cosmos.
but the specific items are not the issue, it is the motive in which they are engaged.

{tic posting below...}
But oh that's right,
people who cloak their minipulating intent with mention of principle or motive are just tricky folks trying to make an end-around move to impose my
extra-biblical capativity upon my subjects.

Again,
concerning cosmetics,
AFF's own poster "Truthseeker" will go down in my book, that as of March 10, 2009, is the clear winner, the undisputed champion, the light-bearer, concerning God's opinion on cosmetics being that GOD HAS NO OPINION at ALL.....afterall, his relentless inquiry resulted in nobody stepping up with scripture saying he [God] does.