You not preaching holiness till you've named it!

[TJJJ]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

God doesn't commit fornication and the wedding has not taken place. To suggest that if the wedding hasn't occurred then God is a fornicator is diabolical. P.S. I am not a dispationalist. I meant no personal offence, but the logic in the point that you made is what I was referencing.

God does not commit fornication and the wedding supper started on the day of Pentecost and has been going on every since,

Christ married the Church on the day of Pentecost. That is when it started and has been going on for 2000 years or so.

To say that Christ is having a relationship with the Church and not be married to Him is fornication, no? What is pre-marital relationship called? Maybe you can help me with this.

[TJJJ]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Wrong.

My wife's my body. But I still have arms and legs.

lol.

That's been said enough, and it's too precious a pearl to throw away any more.

Left you a post on that old thread.....

You might want to break back out your Bible and go to studying again....

LOL

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by TJJJ

Left you a post on that old thread.....

You might want to break back out your Bible and go to studying again....

LOL

My answer is to read what you just responded to again.

[Godsdrummer]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

Paul was addressing the subject of eating meats specifically in Romans. People use that to make a case for not judging, but Paul himself would call out sin if need be. To many OP's, ladies wearing pants is a sin issue, so there is no way not to judge on the issue if that is what you believe. I respect the way you believe and even see where you make a logical case. I am not intolerant to others on the issue and think it is a minor issue. Although, I do think it is a spiritual issue that has been evolving in our country for the last century.

I disagree, Paul used meats AND THE KEEPING OF DAYS, to teach against judging. Read the whole chapter.

Would like to know what your thoughts are on the last verse.

Rom 14:22 Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth.

The whole point of the chapter is teaching against judging, not the eating of meats, nor keeping days holy.
I find it concerning, that we somehow get the idea that we can and even should judge, in the face of direct commandment from Christ, "Judge not lest you be judged".

[allstate1]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

I disagree, Paul used meats AND THE KEEPING OF DAYS, to teach against judging. Read the whole chapter.

Would like to know what your thoughts are on the last verse.

Rom 14:22 Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth.

The whole point of the chapter is teaching against judging, not the eating of meats, nor keeping days holy.
I find it concerning, that we somehow get the idea that we can and even should judge, in the face of direct commandment from Christ, "Judge not lest you be judged".

I find it more concerning that the people who ignore this direct command are the same ones that advocate foot washing.

[good samaritan]

1 Corinthians 6:1 Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? 2 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? 3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life? 4 If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church. 5 I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren?

Seems like we have a dilemma here. It seems like Paul is telling us to judge here in Corinthians. We must rightly divide the Word of Truth. Jesus teaches us to judge not lest ye be judged and forgive and ye shall be forgiven. In other words we will be handled in the way we handle others. If someone has sin in their lives I am not supposed to pretend that they do not for the sake of not judging.

1 Corinthians 5:11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.

According to this Paul would not sit down and have a bite with a lot of professing Christians today. The fact of the matter is we may disagree about dress codes, but surely you would judge (that is distinguish between right in wrong) and make decisions accordingly.

Now concerning Romans 14 if you want to apply that this discussion here is some more of that chapter to look at.

Romans 14:14 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself:but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean. 15 But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat (dress code), now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat (dress code), for whom Christ died. 16 Let not then your good be evil spoken of:17 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink (a dress code); but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.

Paul teaches taking the high road. In other words he said to compromise toward the weaker and that would be those hold a dress code. Paul would not do anything to offend his Brother in the Lord. This judging thing is going two ways because people judge conservative OP's for their belief that a lady should wear feminine apparel. In all actuallity, if a lady or husband of a lady with that conviction compromised their belief for the sake of fitting in with those who hold opposite views it is definitely a sin for them.

23 And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith:for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.

Many of you who accuse Pentecostals for being ultra cons. because of a dress code are in fact judging as well. I assure you our ladies take far more judgement on our side of the fence then those who hold no dress code. I am o.k. with the fact that people disagree, but the fact that many suggest that teaching something contrary to what you believe is judging is in accurate. I apologize if that is the way I would make someone feel, but I cannot help from holding to my beliefs.

I have also noticed that those who have the biggest cow against others for teaching dress codes are people who once believed in dress codes. Seems ironic to me.

[good samaritan]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

I disagree, Paul used meats AND THE KEEPING OF DAYS, to teach against judging. Read the whole chapter.

Would like to know what your thoughts are on the last verse.

Rom 14:22 Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth.

The whole point of the chapter is teaching against judging, not the eating of meats, nor keeping days holy.
I find it concerning, that we somehow get the idea that we can and even should judge, in the face of direct commandment from Christ, "Judge not lest you be judged".

The Spiritual thing happening is the loss of people's natural use. We have slowly evolved from a husbands being the head of the home's to equal partnerships. The husbands role and the wife role or no longer defined. Other then biological differences in the home in our culture their is no differences in the roles of most modern families. They both work to provide, they both share in household chores, neither stay home with kids, etc...

This isn't a mark of a country that is advancing, but it is a mark of a country declining. God has placed men in leading roles for a purpose. I understand that there are some poor excuses for men out there , but that doesn't mean that God's design isn't best. The reason for ladies change of role in our culture was because of men who compromised. I personally believe this has a lot to do with gender identity issue's and homosexuality. I have not too long ago read about how many women don't want to drop their maiden name (this would have stopped the ceremony for me).

For me dress codes are one way that we respect the male and female order of creation.

(PS I very much respect the ladies role in the family and I do not view her as a door mat.)

[Esaias]

I honestly don't understand the "big deal" about dress standards. Some believe a man should never wear short sleeved shirts. I don't see that in the Bible. I also have no interest in going on a crusade about it, or bringing it up every time the word "holiness" comes up.

Seems that some people major on the minors while complaining about others who they think major on the minors. I have never heard so much blather about "standards" except from the anti-standards crowd. The anti-standards crowd talks about it waaaaaay more than anyone else.

jmo.

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

This isn't a mark of a country that is advancing, but it is a mark of a country declining

there is a flow, and we just happen to be at the decline/decadence stage of empire. that it is global now is worth comment. can't help but make parallels to Apocalyptic Scripture, but when has that ever not been true. Still, even the Rothschilds are being subpoenaed now. but ya the decadence stage is pretty well documented i think that has to be your context.

[mfblume]

Just my two cents.... no one would walk away from the bible had they read it for the first time, and talk so much about clothing like all of you do. And no one would equate "holiness" with clothing standards.