Isaiah 3 and jewelry...

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by rdp

Oh brother...where to begin? What's absolutely astounding is your eisegesical handling of I Tim. 2. You state, "in other words, wear it...." S-A-Y W-H-A-T???? What Bible are you reading? Where does I Tim. 2:9 say, "wear it":_________? Clue Mike: You cannot just make-up your own Bible as Thomas Jefferson did!

Let's try to deal with this effectively together.

Firstly, I was quoting Peter. Secondly, Paul's words to Timothy must be understood with the entirety of scripture, which includes Peter's words on the issue. They are not prohibiting all forms of jewelry since that would contradict the rest of the bible, as I indicated.

How many times have I showed that your pet verse in Ezek. 16 cannot be used to condone personal ornamentation, no more than it can be used to condone me wearing nose rings & fine lines! YOU are the one who needs to "think".

Ezekiel can indeed be used to condone Jewelry because, as I already stated, nose rings and badger's skins were not at all considered inappropriate for God to use them as symbols describing His positive love for Israel. You cannot take it from the perspective or OUR DAY and reflect that upon the context. Otherwise, it makes God a buffoon.

God did not do something totally insane. it is obvious that God would use an acceptable means of describing appropriate beauty, and not do something He himself preached against doing. It is flatly illogical to say God used something that is indicative of harlotry in order to show his pure love for Israel. God simply would not dress His bride in manners that would indicate a whore. So you cannot use your argument. It simply stands against all logic and reason.

You claim Rebekka wore jewels in a day when it was okay from God's perspective, but that God changed his mind as though we cannot now handle it since then. You have no bible for that. All that is on your part is an attempt to justify your "standard" in quite a futile manner. This is what happens to man-made tenets. They fail at some point along the way and cannot stand the scrutiny of scripture.

You disregarded the fact that I stated the reasoning you provide about nose rings is flawed. Let me repeat it. IN that day of Ezekiel they were fine. You and I would not have thought anything of it had we lived then and there. But you are comparing cultural changes over millennia later with what occurred then, and acting on pure knee-jerk reactions of people who do not stop to think about this.

Consider this: Adam was given a robe by God! See such a person today walk down Main street and laugh all you want, as anyone today would, but that did not mean God was silly to make a robe for Adam that Adam would not have laughed at whatsoever.

So in short, you are taking a nose ring which was not at all considered "worldly" and "weird" as it is today, and throwing your 21st century perspective on it when it was valid and okay and the NORM for the day of Ezekiel.

Well, God also used the imagery of jewels to depict His people an immoral woman. You can't have it both ways Mike!

The fact is the bible HAS IT BOTH WAYS and you actually know it. But you're frustrated because that fact does not fit well with your doctrine. The only sensible conclusion is that jewelry is considered fine and acceptable in some situations and not in others. That means there is a difference of excess, etc. How simpler can it get? We must blind ourselves from the FACT that God condoned jewelry by sheer virtue of the fact He used it in describing what He did in His love for Israel.

So what you SHOULD be saying is that jewelry used in the manner God described it in Ezek 16 is fine!!!! But jewelry used in the manner of harlotry is not fine. there is a difference. Otherwise it makes no sense at all to read Ezekiel 16 and read about Rebekka. To continue to say otherwise is sheer nonsense in light of these facts.

And yes, TV is definitely evil & no child of God should own one in their home, but it takes a spiritual mind to understand this. O', I know this flies in the face of the politically correct "apostolics" of the day...how dare anyone call them to separation from the world.

A computer online is FAR MORE DESTRUCTIVE than a tv. But you fail to know the reason INTERNET was passed and TV was not. I was there and saw what was stated. It was stated amongst the UPCI that they did not know what was coming when internet was already accepted by most apostolics. Had they known, they would not have allowed it. But 'since it was already in effect after it was too late to stop it, it was said in the ministers magazine, FORWARD, that we have to teach the people to act like Christians and learn how to handle the internet.

Regarding Rebekah [while you're quoting from Gen., try looking at chp. 35:1-5!], is that mankind was not the temple of God at this point.

Again, the only consistently reasonable conclusion is that there is a marked distinction between jewelry of a harlot and that which is acceptable by God.

But, in the NT, we're explicitly told "N-O-T with gold..." What part of "not" do you "not" understand? I've explained the greek ad nauseum regarding I Ptr. 3. How about looking at the NIV transaltion of I Ptr. 3 for starters.

God also allowed polygamy under the OT...how many wives do you have Mike [watch out you might qualify as a "legalist" for obeying the Word!].

Brother do not grasp here. God condoned jewelry period. Do not make God one who does not practice what he preaches.

But, he also showed His displeasure w/ it periodically. Same w/ the literal ornamentation of His people [Ex. 33, Hos. 2, Jer. 4, Ezek. 23, Deut. 7:25, Is. 3, etc.]. You cannot just sweep these multitude of passages under the rug [remember that bit about 'chopping out' the Word?]...at least not to me. Think I'll stick w/ the Word of God!

Yes, study the Word, since you are missing the right division of it. AT TIMES he condoned AT TIMES He did not. Why? Was He wrong in one of those times? Of course not, but you make it out that He was! The reason WHY is because there is a distinction.

It's so simple to see once you disregard the demand to stick to a doctrine that man concocted. Until you are willing to stand on the bible alone without your standards, you will not see this.