Isaiah 3 and jewelry...

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by rdp

When it says "not with gold, pearls, or costly apparell." Ughhhh, I think he probably means what he says! Now, be a good little "scholar" & compare that to eating/talking !!!

Still same strategy I see. "Not with" on repeat x 20 even after you yourself have proven that this phrase without context does not give us interpretation. But as you were

For the LAST time... it's not a point of comparing eating and talking. Read that 20 times just to cover your future repeats. What makes the verse right or wrong is not comparing eating or wearing clothes or talking and decide which is most important and therefore has more meaning. DOH! That's exactly everyone's point to you. You attempted to set-up a straw man by suggesting our "rule" was a blanket, and wouldn't work in certain scriptures (Romans 13 for example). Our reply was a slap on the forehead -- of course not, because that's not our argument. Way to show you lack listening skills! Our point is the word needs context. You agreed after we submitted verses that were OBVIOUS and you agreed. Now quit playing stupid.... at least I think you're playing.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by rdp

Yes, "progress."

Wrong again Jeffrey. He is precisely prohibiting outward ornamentation [jewelry, costly array, elaborate hairstyles]...in exchange for inward ornamentaion [meekness, humility, etc.]. That's the whole tenor of the passages in question.

Sorry... close... but not quite worthy of a cigar!

They aren't being LITERALLY exchanged. We still adorn ourselves smart guy. Women still brush their glory, shop for pretty clothing, groom themselves, make themselves smell good, vaseline the eyes, pinch the cheeks, look for colors that accent their eyes... It's impossible to not adorn ourselves. But we see, in a Gospel way, that our truest beauty is that which is incorruptible, and that comes with a heart submitted to the cross. That's true beauty.

So... you are pretty close. But far enough away to fit your own private interpretation

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by rdp

Ughhh, say what?? I've repeatedly quoted in these posts that it takes both the inward & the outward [2 Cor. 7:1]...not one or the other as you imply.

That is not my point. My point is what you speak about the most. You repeated more of the outward by far than the inward. It's a matter of one MORE than the other.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

Still same strategy I see. "Not with" on repeat x 20 even after you yourself have proven that this phrase without context does not give us interpretation. But as you were

Well you're getting closer [remember that forest/trees analogy?]. For probably about the 30th X now, the [here, let me help ya' out by putting it in caps] CONTEXT IS ABOUT THE EXTERNAL ADORNMENTS, WHICH HAD A 'N-O-T' ATTACHED TO IT, VS. THE INTERNAL ADORNMENTS, WHICH HAS A 'BUT THIS' TIED TO IT." Hello...is anybody at home????

For the LAST time... it's not a point of comparing eating and talking.

Then quit appealling to the verses....which YOU guys brought up...not me...moving right along....

Read that 20 times just to cover your future repeats. What makes the verse right or wrong is not comparing eating or wearing clothes or talking and decide which is most important and therefore has more meaning. DOH!

More explaining away from the Jeffrey bench...about verses that YOU guys introduced!!! Oh, & it's not a matter of which is "most important," it's a matter of comparing natural things [eating/talking to unnatural things [decorative ornamentation to the temple of God].....now, YOU read that for about the 20th time "to cover your future repeats." !


That's exactly everyone's point to you.

And MY point to them is that they use verses dealing w/ things internally natural to things externally unnatural. Should I put this in another language so you can understand it?
You attempted to set-up a straw man by suggesting our "rule" was a blanket, and wouldn't work in certain scriptures (Romans 13 for example). Our reply was a slap on the forehead -- of course not, because that's not our argument.

I simply demostrated that you won't be consistent in your usage of self-imposed idioms....& the point still stands, regardless of your backtracking in Eph. 5 & Rom. 13. Fact remains that you're inconsistent....go figure....next....


Way to show you lack listening skills! Our point is the word needs context. You agreed after we submitted verses that were OBVIOUS and you agreed. Now quit playing stupid.... at least I think you're playing.

Hmmm let's see, "stupid, pharisee, thick, legalist, puritan,".....& you want to school ME on behaviour?? You guys are a hoot...seriously! Repent & believe/obey the Bible!

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

Sorry... close... but not quite worthy of a cigar!

They aren't being LITERALLY exchanged. We still adorn ourselves smart guy. Women still brush their glory, shop for pretty clothing, groom themselves, make themselves smell good, vaseline the eyes, pinch the cheeks, look for colors that accent their eyes...

Christian women do not 'look for colors that accent their eyes' [if you're refferring to make-up, that is], since we don't paint God's temple [not that I expect you to understand that principle].
It's impossible to not adorn ourselves.

Yes, so long as it's not w/ the artificiality of worldly ornamentation....just as Paul & peter both stated!


But we see, in a Gospel way, that our truest beauty is that which is incorruptible, and that comes with a heart submitted to the cross. That's true beauty.

Yes, I agree. But a "heart submitted to the cross" knows the way of death to the world systems in exchange for glorification to God's system. That's the principle of Calvary [among others].

So... you are pretty close. But far enough away to fit your own private interpretation

Well, if ya' wanna' call my simply believing what Paul said in I Tim. 2, for. ex., then call it my "own pvt. interpretaion,"....makes no difference to me! I simply believe the Bible....oughta' give it a try! Look, I've got grown-up things to do...believe what you will....I'm sticking w/ the written Word of God. Busy man.........

[rdp]

Originally Posted by mfblume

That is not my point. My point is what you speak about the most. You repeated more of the outward by far than the inward. It's a matter of one MORE than the other.

That's simply because this thread topic is ABOUT the outer....just never stops does it guys?

[Maximilian]

Originally Posted by rdp

Hmmm let's see, "stupid, pharisee, thick, legalist, puritan,".....& you want to school ME on behaviour?? You guys are a hoot...seriously! Repent & believe/obey the Bible!

Well you're getting closer [remember that forest/trees analogy?]. For probably about the 30th X now, the [here, let me help ya' out by putting it in caps] CONTEXT IS ABOUT THE EXTERNAL ADORNMENTS, WHICH HAD A 'N-O-T' ATTACHED TO IT, VS. THE INTERNAL ADORNMENTS, WHICH HAS A 'BUT THIS' TIED TO IT." Hello...is anybody at home????

Seriously, that made about as much sense as a bum on a street corner.

[Godsdrummer]

Originally Posted by rdp

Well, if ya' wanna' call my simply believing what Paul said in I Tim. 2, for. ex., then call it my "own pvt. interpretaion,"....makes no difference to me! I simply believe the Bible....oughta' give it a try! Look, I've got grown-up things to do...believe what you will....I'm sticking w/ the written Word of God. Busy man.........

They aren't being LITERALLY exchanged. We still adorn ourselves smart guy. Women still brush their glory, shop for pretty clothing, groom themselves, make themselves smell good, vaseline the eyes, pinch the cheeks, look for colors that accent their eyes...

Christian women do not 'look for colors that accent their eyes' [if you're refferring to make-up, that is], since we don't paint God's temple [not that I expect you to understand that principle].

It's impossible to not adorn ourselves.

Yes, so long as it's not w/ the artificiality of worldly ornamentation....just as Paul & peter both stated!


rdp
First what does rdp stand for? Just wandering nothing more. I want to comend you for responding to everyone that post to you I am being complimentery just so you know.

Now I have a question. Correct me if I am mistaken, it is ok to adorn ourselves as long as it is not with the artificial ornamentation of the world? That just does not compute.
Women can still brush their glory, shop for pretty clothing, groom themselves, make themselves smell good, vaseline the eyes, pinch the cheeks, look for colors that accent their eyes...

But they can't wear Gold, pearls or costly array? I think you better look at this scripture again.
1Ti 2:9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;

How then do you justify the price of clothes women spend and I take it you must require women to put thier hair up in a skin tight bun, anything else would be sin by your definition of this passage.

Now I don't know if you pastor or attend a church that teaches against these things. I just know I was raised where the double standards were so prevalent, women did not cut thier hair but they permed it to make it look shorter. They did not wear makeup per say but then they would do other things to make themselve look good as long as it was not worldly makeup bought in a store. They would even pluck their eye brows and any number of other things. To me this is like Christian cussing. darn instead of damm, shoot instead of s--- , frigging instead of ... well you know what I am saying. If it is sin to say one thing it is sin to say the other. What I am saying is this either you live by all of it as you preach or you understand you are not understanding what the writer is saying. Simple as that.

You keep refering to the greek on some things then you want to come back to the english when you quote "not"

1Pe 3:3 Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;

Again you make so much of the wearing of gold and over look the braiding of the hair and wearing apparel. Oh wait I know you have delt with the apparel, that is when you refer to the greek.

Well here is a news flash, if God is not willing to perish then he did not make his word so hard you had to be a greek scholar to understand how to be saved and stay saved.

[Truthseeker]

RDP

Are you against wrist rings that tell time?(watches) wedding bands? Ties? colorful outfits for the sisters

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Maximilian

Seriously, that made about as much sense as a bum on a street corner.

Of course you would say that...."the carnal mind is not subject to the things of God, neither indeed CAN BE."