The Gospel of Mark 7th Chapter says this:
7:1 Now when the Pharisees gathered to him, with some of the scribes who had come from Jerusalem, 2 they saw that some of his disciples ate with hands that were defiled, that is, unwashed. 3 (For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they wash their hands, holding to the tradition of the elders, 4 and when they come from the marketplace, they do not eat unless they wash. And there are many other traditions that they observe, such as the washing of cups and pots and copper vessels and dining couches.) 5 And the Pharisees and the scribes asked him, “Why do your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat with defiled hands?”
I have been going back in forth with some brothers at Pulpit Pimps which is a beneficial (if you can get past the satire, which is pretty though provoking at times) to see what the latest heresyand it supporters are. The authors are pretty creative with their photo editing which makes it all the more funny! Anyway I have been defending things that some commenters feel isn’t liberty. So let me ask the questions:
1. What exactly does John mean when he says “don’t love the world nor the things of the world” this seems to be the catch all verse for Christians when they don’t have a proof text to tell you what you are doing is wrong.
2. Where is the line drawn in Christians modesty? Is a two piece bathing suit too far, what about a tattoo in the lower back, or a tattoo on the neck, or a tattoo at all? Can Christian men wear earrings? My real question is who holds the line as it relates to Christian modesty?
3. When do we know we are infringing upon a Christian’s liberty and freedom in Christ and when we are giving sound wisdom?
4. When a Christian who feels he/she has a particular liberty is confronted how should they respond?
5. Finally how is that two Holy Spirit filled Christians can disagree on issues like these and what happens if we continue to disagree?
Thought provoking questions..we have to remember Christ came to die for the ungodly (all of us) and through Him we are justified. God does not look so much on the flesh but at the heart ….what if a brother has an ear ring but His heart is focused on the Lord and is going after Him whereas there is the status quo Christian who looks the part but inside really does not want to have Jesus as Lord and in his heart is all types of self focus and desire to please only himself. Does the word say that we who compare ourselves by ourselves are not wise…look to the Bible to guide in what is/is not correct …some things are obvious (adultery, murder, stealing) while others are not (having a glass of wine, watching x,y,z movie, eating a certain food) and it is there that we listen to the Holy Spirit to lead and guide us. …..thoughts anyone?
Great questions. I think these questions and a couple of others really highlight the fact that Christianity is a walk of faith and sacrifice. Sometimes the faith is to trust God to work in my life and in others without my help in bringing conviction in others’ lives. The sacrifice is summed up in Phi 2:1-4 in not looking out for my own personal interest but rather the interests and well being of others.
One of the difficulties I believe people are running into in the discussion over at P-P.org is some are trying to establish a single objective line and say “anything over this line is immodest and anything on the other side is not. ” Philippians seems to say that anything done out of selfish personal interest is sin and anything not done of selfish personal interst is not.
Folks are going to have a difficult time backing the location of the line up with Scripture. But it’s fun to watch them try. And it’s interesting to see some of the positions presented.
Melville the Great,
Thanks for the comments brother and keep it up over there. If I am ever depressed I always know where to go for a great laugh! Not to mention the fine work in exposing heretics and challenging those who support them to question them. Many have been delivered or at least challenged to think biblically and critically. We don’t always agree on how that should be done but I am thankful that you are on this side or I am your side or we are on the same mission. To protect God’s flock. Much love!
Christians, even great Christians, can be very judgemental because we ultimately, although sanctified, bear a sinful nature. Oftentimes I’ve seen the sort of judgements you talk of as a way of “puffing ourselves up” above other Christians. It becomes a source of pride because our values no longer are in who we are in Christ but in what we do or refrain from doing.
Modesty is a great example of something that in the church can become very legalistic. Should we dress modestly? Absolutely, but we should do it out of our own conviction not to please the critique of man. There shouldn’t be a certain “dress code” all Christians need to abide by. People are not stupid and women certainly know what temptation looks like. A Christian woman should not dress to tempt a man or in a way that would cause lustful thoughts because she doesn’t want that. She doesn’t want to cause lust in a man’s heart and she doesn’t want to dress in a way that she knows could provoke such thoughts. So it’s a matter of personal conviction.
Now as for “don’t love the things of the world” this is where it gets tricky. We cannot completely shelter ourselves from the outside because as Christians we are to be a light shining in a dark place. At the same time we shouldn’t blatantly engage in activities that are ungodly, such as the club scene, bars, etc. There is a fine line and it is very difficult to draw it. Like the Bible says, what may be right in the eyes of one man may not be right in the eyes of another. As Christians we should respect each others opinions on issues that are not defined as moral absolutes Biblically. We should ultimately focus on the Cross and not bicker about our minor differences.
I think when the comments over at Melvin’s blog are reviewed in detail, very few are presenting views as “Law”. Very few who object to something like say a tattoo on the forehead are claiming that anyone who has one is “going to hell”. To claim someone is going to hell for having a tattoo on their forehead is legalism.
Nobody is saying a person with a tattoo on their forehead is unsaved or not a Christian. Nobody is saying someone with a tattoo on their forehead won’t go to Heaven. What is being discussed is what is most fitting for a Christian in terms of Christian living.
The vast majority who disagree with you Mr. Woods, myself and the brother using the handle “truthofgod” included, we are not claiming that someone who does what we have raised as an issue is going to burn in hell for it, that is legalism. We agree with you that saints are sinners saved by grace through faith.
We are simply discussing what might be better in terms of attire and accessories, to be most effective in representing Christ and not living for ourselves.
Unfortunately, there are way more blogs than I have time to effectively monitor, so I’ll continue with you on Melvin’s blog rather than trying to discuss this in two different places with the exact same person.
Actually that is a false statement IC. Legalism isn’t just salvific it is impressing upon another Christians conscience the need to do something that God has not commanded them to do. All Christians have only one response to “sin” which you and truthofgod both labeled tatoos and certain articles of clothing. When sin is presented to a Christian my only response is repentance. So once you call something sin (which you clearly did) that the bible does not call sin that is legalism.
Well Melvin has closed comments, so I guess we’ll have to continue here.
Mr. Woods, you say I labeled a tattoo sin. You say I “clearly” said it was a sin to have a tattoo. Please quote in full where I said that?
I want to also point out (after seeing one of your comments), I never cited old covenant law in my statements that I don’t feel it’s modest for Christians to wear tattoos and Christian men to have bling in their ears. I don’t base what I’m saying off “The Law” but rather what in our culture draws attention to ones self.
I noticed your response regarding thongs and in that we agree. And I feel the exact same statements you’ve mentioned regarding something such as a Christian woman wearing a thong on the beach is likewise applicable with the items I have mentioned fall outside the scope of modesty. Certain things do nothing but call attention to ourselves instead of a more modest look.
I mentioned tattoos, many companies won’t even hire you if you have a visible tattoo. So I find my stance against them to be within what our society finds to be outside of modesty.
I mentioned earrings in mens’ ears. Men going for interviews as a business executive might be sent home rather quickly by most major corporations. Again, I feel my stance is within our norms for this society and what is viewed as being outside the scope of modesty.
I also had another question for you, that I hope you have time to answer.
I’m not sure what you disagree with, can you explain?
I’m not saying pastors are needed, ( I’m sure you know how I feel about that) I’m saying if a believer desires to aid other believers the desire is a good one, once chosen if this person wants to call them self pastor, bishop, head deacon hay they can knock them selfs out, But to expect other believers to cow tow before them is ludicrous. the only gift I can see that has to be evident would be love.
I agree 100%, a congregation should choose it’s overseer. For some guy to open a building and charge himself as “anointed of god” cannot be supported by any scripture in the Bible.
hay IC did you know that some companies will not hire a person over 50, or if your a Christian, or your hair is to long, appealing to the secular world may not be the best thing,
1 Tm 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;
Where’s the scripture about men, I believe most of the scriptures are dealing with woman, please correct me if I’m wrong
1Cor8:13 Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend.
It’s not about what I ware, tat’s, ear rings, the scripture above is about not offending your brother, you know the LOVE thing, am I my brothers keeper?
IC,
My position is not even close to that. Not even near, it is as far away as Satan being a Christian! Not even possible. I am 100% against combining different faiths to do the work of the Body of Christ. I will not march up the street with a Muslim as two faiths trying to solve hunger. I would walk with a Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, Homosexual, Transexual, or Athiest if we were in a paticular organization. Such would be like what we do for Susan G Koman, or United Way, or Feed the Poor organizations. Those groups have an agenda not attached to “faith”. But I would not partner up with a mosque in the name of “God” because that would cause great confusion and put us on equal footings as faith in God. However again I would partner with anyone who is working to fight hugner, AIDS, Cancer, Poverty and the like as long as there is no outward “faith” they are doing it in the name of unless of course that is Christian.
Hope that answers your question.
Also I was responding to truth of God I may have mistakenly brought you into it. But if I recall you have used 1 Timothy 2 for modesty issues. I am still asking the questions to you.
1. What if someone disagreed with what you wear and said that you were immodest? How would you respond?
2. Where is the line in modesty? Who draws the line? You, enough Christians getting together who agree? Who makes the standard and where is the line?
Msamu you said:
“I agree 100%, a congregation should choose it’s overseer. For some guy to open a building and charge himself as “anointed of god” cannot be supported by any scripture in the Bible.”
I agree 200% (is that possible). DTG said something to me about 8 months or so ago that really stuck with me and I couldn’t shake it no matter how hard I tried. So here I am thanks to him and being honest to the text and not religion.
You stand brother, their doctrine is of man of the flesh not of God, their’s not one scripture taken in context supporting the heresy of the Pastoral office as it is defined today.
Your spot on
Gentleman I have a question: If no one is allowed to begin a church on his own under what he believes to be the leading of the Lord, then doesn’t that imply that every pastor must come from some denomination or organized body of believers? What if the church or denomination that he’s a member of is corrupt? What happens if he’s not the only one who recognizes it and a group of them decides to meet together on our own? No one takes a vote for him but he begans to teach/moderate the group. Is he in error? Should he stop and take a vote of the people to make sure he’s legit? Should he tell each of them to go and join a denomination and wait to be recognized as having some gift from God?
These may seem rhetorical but they are genuine questions.
Mr. Woods, you mentioned:
Actually then, in this regard, you and Mr. Warren are rather closer than you might suspect and I don’t say that to you to try and disrespect you and I know you don’t endorse Rick Warren’s teachings.
However, when you’re seeking to do “good” with groups that have a Christ-less agenda, it’s Christ-less at the core. Which is why instead of the United Way (a group that supports homosexual groups and the baby killers at Planned Parenthood with some of every dollar you give them), I would recommend considering working with the Salvation Army. Instead of secular “Feed the Poor” organizations, consider the many Christian groups doing the same work and openly doing it in the name of Christ.
Thank you for responding.
Can you show me “secular” in the scriptures IC. And if you feel this way that is fine; however you have “no” biblical support for your perspective. Do you know how many corporations support these types of organizations. You would have to tell every Christian that works for such corporations “you are in Sin and must quit”. If this is your conviction than fine, but it isn’t biblical my friend. Your shoes, your clothes, your food, the materials used to build your house may all be used to support these “secular” organizations.
Actually BLD,
A group of believers are free to meet as often as they like under any guidelines they like and can appoint as many or as few leaders they like to guide them into Christlikeness. So I can get a group of belivers together and they can set me as one of the elders (I don’t believe in senior/singular pastoral functions so I wouldn’t accept that even if they wanted me to do it) to help govern the church. So we are free in Christ brother. As a matter of fact we can meet for years before this has to happen.
It just isn’t biblcal for a man to say he is “called” to the pastorate. You want find that and if so he better had recorded the audible voice or I am going to call him a fraud.
Mr. Woods, you asked:
1. It would depend on the particulars of their claim. I’m not going to be so bold as to say they are wrong, they might show me something that I need to correct.
2. Well how do you affirm that a Christian woman wearing a thong on the beach crosses any line? Who drew that line? You? Enough other Christians telling you that was the line? Who made that standard for you to affirm? As I have already mentioned, for where we live which is America, you can’t even get a job at many places with an earring in your ear or visible tattoo. So they obviously fall outside of modesty even for many heathens. Even many unbelievers reject those things when they are hiring people to represent their own business ventures. Modesty in appearance is an issue that involves the people who are looking at you. Asking a woman if she feels it is wise to wear a thong is not a question asked because she’s wearing it alone in private, but rather because others are seeing it. So if we claim Christ and anyone seeing us feels we are about ourselves based on our appearance, that could impact our ability to speak with them, or even a brother/sister in Christ about the gospel.
Bro. Lionel,
Whoa! Wouldn’t you want to know what THEY MEAN when they say God called them before you call them a fraud? Now I know that you are not a respecter of persons but you have many pastors in that right column who would say that God called them into the ministry. Several of them started ministries seperate from any denominational oversight. One in particular is PJ. Are they all frauds?
Mr. Woods, when I speak about “secular” I’m not talking about where you buy your meat. But rather who you choose to lock arms with when you as a Christian seek to keep Galatians 6:10.
If you’re seeking to lock up with people who have an organization that does not affirm Christ in your acts of charity. Who’s name is the group doing the charity in?
IC,
Those same companies desire the female workers to dress immodestly, as you would define it, whenever a male client is in the office. It goes something like “Hey Mary, how about unbuttoning that third button when Mr. Moneybags comes in the office today. Last time he was here he mentioned finding you very attractive and it may help us close the deal”. Now IC, should the office scenario be the standard? I think not. This analogy of the employment field fails miserably as a comparison to how Christians should govern themselves. What society deems acceptable or non-acceptable is not because of a desire for holiness or modesty but rather pragmatism. Society will tolerate whatever brings in more money. They can in no way be used to defend YOUR personal hangups if you plan to be consistent with your analogy.
Regarding this debate over Elders. So we all feel God called us to repentance in Christ, but Mr. Woods says someone is a “fraud” if they feel God called them to be an Elder?
1 Timothy 3 is the measure. And if someone desires the office, their being affirmed under the criteria provided there in scripture would prove whether or not they are called.
BLD, what a corporation does outside the bounds of morality is not comparable.
I stand 100% by what I’ve said.
IC,
What a corporation does INSIDE the bounds of morality is also NOT comparable to how a Christian should govern themselves when it comes to how to dress or their personal appearance. You may well be standing by what you but that only implies that you are willing to stand alone because nothing else is there.
I get it, you don’t agree with tattoo’s, piercings, and the like but you don’t have any biblical support for your insistance that every other Christian follow your convictions on the matter so you decide to just repeat it over and over again to prove you’re right. Ok. My mistake.
Wow, you guys have really been busy!
Good discussion though.
After reading all of this, I’m thinking about getting involved in body building so I can get a really bumpin’ tattoo of a Bible with the words “Living and active, sharper than a two edged sword” in a circles, plastered across my left pectoral. And of course I will get a set of praying hands on my left arm. I haven’t decided if I will put it on my forearm or near my shoulder.
Cheers,
Melvin
By the way, I think what IC is saying is simply that tattooing and piercing were generally considered to be in poor taste. Now excessive tattooing and piercing (yes, I know. Excessive is very relative) is considered in poor taste. Further, Christians should not take part in those things considered in poor taste. (Standing on the street cornier, preaching against sin is not included in this restriction.)
Should a Christian wear Daisy Dukes? No. They’re immodest. Is it a sin for a Christian to wear Daisy Dukes? Only if she’s really fat.
Should a preacher preach in a muscle shirt or a wife beater undershirt? No. It’s in poor taste. Is it a sin? No. Unless the guy has a belly the size of mine and man-breasts.
Some people will swear drinking adult beverages is a sin. But there is nothing in Scripture to identify it as such. There is, however, plenty within Scripture to indicate that not all things for which I have the freedom to do are really profitable for me or the rest of the Body. But that profitability is going to be on a case by case, circumstance by circumstance basis.
You should get it on your lower back!
I already have my wife’s name tattooed there. Picture this in Celtic lettering:
PEGGY BONITA SCOTT JONES
People only see it when I go swimming in my Speedos.
Melvin you need help! LOL!!!
Col. 3:12Therefore, as God’s chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience. 13Bear with each other and forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another. Forgive as the Lord forgave you. 14And over all these virtues put on love, which binds them all together in perfect unity.
Many wear holy titles, others dress religiously conservative and most clothe their speech with holy language.
A good measure or policy is to make sure a non-believer is NOT more virtuous than a believer (NOT more compassionate, kind, humble…and especially loving), not whether a non-believer or the secular adhers more to society’s dress code.
Peace and blessings