Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[tinka]

Di,
That is a "sorry" excuse and not valid according to scripture or SP. That is a justified law made by people and then inserted into the church manual like several other things recently spoken on some of these threads.  There is no law that states I must wear a ring to say I am married where I would want to go. The true believer knows what the story is and where to find it. Your just too lax in too many things. In your posts it shows that you do not except SP in the manner she speaks it in so many numerous things you have brought out. A lot of it is waste of time...

[Johann]

Actually, Tinka, abotu the wedding ring, thing......it was never a hard fast rule anywhere but here in NAD.  Where wedding rings were law, it was not enforced.....at all.  the problem came in when we sent missionaries to countries where it was law, they wore their rings there in accordance to the laws of that land, and then did not take them off when they returned.  Also the in consistency was further exposed with the migration of people from one country to another.

So even though we here in NAD were told it was something as biblical and solid at Sabbath doctrine, it was not.  it was more a corporate policy, like no jeans at the office.   Sorry.

- - -

Wedding rings were added by the people in church manual. Not followed by SP. and there is no excuse, no reason that fits. It's vanity. Not important and a waste of money but yet it gives the go on jewelry to public view. It gives the go on charismatic movement, in music. I did watch one though that they had to be commented on and it was beautiful, solemn, and reverent with some happy music that was properly inspired by their appearance of true worship. I had tears and so proud of them as they appeared better then Gaither in spirituality and true behavior.  Even their dress was better at that time as previous seen strapless and gaudy. What happened to woman's apparel in the "pants". Yea, just old stuff. The new age is in. I would like to see in nationally and worldwide view strict appearance of SP. Let them see the difference in the real true worship and forget the portraying of all ones self in song, dress and actions. Forget the gyrations and let the melody flow as that is what turns the heart.  SDA do have many singers that can handle this. Some I have to get away from it. Right now I am liking the Rev series that is on. and I do miss LS and her inspirational comments. That is what made 3abn. Not the "stories" as they were told over and over until it was old and began to get doubtful or was LS a better deceiver as sympathizers portray? The fruits and actions of LS just don't portray it ...but they do...hmmmm. (Just personal thoughts) until actions prove wrong. Tommy Shelton was their (first??) mistake to portray on 3abn! Pew money supported him too. Johann, God is not a respector of this and I think TS might be left to his folly but am not going to judge as God knows all cause and sickness. He had the message, he had the light and he had his protector, his brother.  It is sad as we see humans bend to outer limits and realize they are now in space but my sympathy is with the victims. Somebody had to do something and it needs to be commended they did it. TS photo looks very sick. You cannot love God and hurt his children just for your own desires. How many people has his brother hurt?

[Johann]

Di,
That is a "sorry" excuse and not valid according to scripture or SP. That is a justified law made by people and then inserted into the church manual like several other things recently spoken on some of these threads.  There is no law that states I must wear a ring to say I am married where I would want to go. The true believer knows what the story is and where to find it. Your just too lax in too many things. In your posts it shows that you do not except SP in the manner she speaks it in so many numerous things you have brought out. A lot of it is waste of time...

[Johann]

I tried to make this a separate topic. An error has occurred. Sorry!

[Johann]

This is one of the statements of Ellen G. White which has caused quite a bit of discussion. Perhaps some read only the first part while others read only the last part.

 

      I feel deeply over this leavening process which seems to be
     going on among us, in the conformity to custom and fashion.
     Not one penny should be spent for a circlet of gold to testify that
     we are married. In countries where the custom is imperative, we
     have no burden to condemn those who have their marriage ring;
     let them wear it if they can do so conscientiously, but let not our
     missionaries feel that the wearing of the ring will increase their
     influence one jot or tittle.--Special Testimonies to Ministers
     and Workers, No. 3, p. 6 (TM, pp. 180, 181). {4BIO 196.2}

[tinka]

Now this is where a true, true believer can have the test of vanity (smile). What will your vanity let your conscience do! "we have not burden to condemn", she put the burden on ones own choice and let the conscience "except the fault".

Remember her conscience at her baptism? She could not see how the others could be baptised and still have the rings on. This one statement alone is why I used the "poor excuse" term. She was not going to make statement against the "law of the land". But carefully put the burden on each individual and the vanity shows by the continuation of that weak excuse to the continuation to wear it.

Her statement is quite in consistency of Scripture which is quite direct in wearing of the gold, silver, jewelry etc, etc. anyways now look at what it has done for just one stumpling block. Just watch Hope channel and see what the "if" in many consciences expanded in great portrayal of "waste of time and money" in diamonds, rubies, and on and on.  There is no conscience left on that matter! How is that to watch the majority follow after their "vanity". Scripture is clear. My own actions will deter the need to display. Oh and by the way I like the beauty of jewelry but I know what Jesus says and why. I have a hard time coping with what I do unintentionally to displease him let alone do intentional things.

[Johann]

In 1913 a minister's wife in Scotland wrote a letter to Ellen G. White about the wedding ring. Ellen asked her son to reply on her behalf, and here is his letter:

  "NOW REGARDING THE QUESTION RAISED IN YOUR LETTER. THE WEARING
     OF A GOLD RING AS A MATTER OF ORNAMENT IS A USELESS PRACTICE, AND
     CONTRARY TO THE BIBLE INSTRUCTION REGARDING THE SIMPLICITY OF DRESS
     AND APPAREL. THE WEARING OF A RING AS A TOKEN OF LOYALTY IN THOSE
     COUNTRIES AND AMONG THOSE PEOPLE WHERE SUCH A CUSTOM IS SO THOROUGHLY
     ESTABLISHED THAT DEPARTURE FROM THAT CUSTOM WILL BE UNIVERSALLY
     MISUNDERSTOOD IS, IN MY OPINION, QUITE ANOTHER MATTER, AND I THINK
     THAT IF YOU SHOULD FOLLOW THE COUNSEL OF MEN AND WOMEN OF EXPERIENCE
     WHO HAVE LABORED IN GREAT BRITAIN AND IN INDIA, THE LORD WILL NOT
     COUNT IT TO YOU AS A VIOLATION REGARDING THE SIMPLICITY OF WOMEN'S
     APPAREL.
        "POSSIBLY YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN THE STORY OF MY WIFE'S
     EXPERIENCE WITH THE WEDDING RING. WHILE SHE WAS ATTENDING BIBLE
     SCHOOL IN AUSTRALIA, I BECAME WELL ACQUAINTED WITH HER, AND WHEN THE
     TIME DREW NEAR FOR OUR MARRIAGE, I PROPOSED THAT IT BE IN TASMANIA
     AT HER FATHER'S HOME. REGARDING THIS SHE WAS NOT ENTHUSIASTIC, AND
     UPON INQUIRY, I LEARNED THAT HER FATHER HAD VERY DECIDED OPINIONS
     REGARDING THE DUTY OF THE WIFE TO WEAR THE WEDDING RING, AND MY WIFE,
     KNOWING THAT AMERICANS LOOKED UPON THIS MATTER DIFFERENTLY THAN THE
     BRITISH PEOPLE, SUPPOSED THAT I WOULD OBJECT.
        "SHE DID NOT CARE FOR IT PERSONALLY, BUT I PURCHASED A RING, AND
     WE WERE MARRIED WITH IT BECAUSE HER FATHER'S FAMILY AND ALL HER
     FRIENDS REGARDED IT AS ESSENTIAL. AFTER WE HAD BEEN MARRIED A FEW
     MONTHS, AND HAD SETTLED DOWN IN OUR HOME WHERE WE WERE WELL KNOWN,
     SHE LAID ASIDE THE RING, AND WHEN I ASKED HER WHY SHE TOOK IT OFF,
     SHE SAID IT WAS IN THE WAY WHEN SHE WAS WASHING. I DON'T KNOW WHAT
     BECAME OF THE RING, BUT SHE HAS NOT WORN IT SINCE. I THINK THAT IN
     THIS EXPERIENCE IT WAS HER DESIRE TO FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTION OF PAUL
     WHEN HE WROTE, 'WHETHER THEREFORE YE EAT, OR DRINK, OR WHATSOEVER
     YE DO, DO ALL TO THE GLORY OF GOD.'
        "BY THE WEARING OF THE RING DURING THAT PORTION OF OUR EXPERIENCE
     WHERE ITS ABSENCE WOULD HAVE BEEN WONDERED AT, AND CAUSED UNNECESSARY
     PREJUDICE, AND BY LAYING IT ASIDE AS SOON AS THAT EXPERIENCE WAS
     TERMINATED, SHE HAS FELT THAT SHE WAS DOING THAT WHICH WOULD BEST
     SERVE THE CAUSE OF OUR MASTER."--DF 121, WCW TO MRS. W. E. INGLE,
     APRIL 14, 1913.]--DF 121. {4BIO 197.1}

[tinka]

So would this be the excuse in our own country to do our own free will and vanity. It is just too close to vanity now and waste of money as the inch gave into the millions of inches and SP done away with and that is the "way it's done" while it is spread world wide. Inch by inch --Now display is everywhere for no more then the vanity obsession.

Then you must not disregard a very very direct statement.  "Is it worth taking that chance" she claims? Not for me! I do not want to be a stumbling block for anyone.

[princessdi]

Ok, but my only concern is that if it is biblical church doctrine, that that is what it needs to be. Not depending on where you live.  This is not the case with the Sabbath.

I'm sorry, but I grew up with the mission stories about people who risked imprisonment and death to keep the Sabbath, or even be baptized.  All kinds of miraculous tales of village witch doctors and such.  The Sabbath IS biblically sound, and treated so.  There is no allowing for cultural differences.  Neither should there be. 

If we insist that the wearing of wedding bands is also biblical doctrine, then there should be no allowing for cultural differences.  Joining the SDA church and keeping the Sabbath often jeopardized even destroyed families livelihood(sp), and personal safety, yet we proudly told the stories as a testament to their faith in God, and rightly so.  Do you not beieve we should have the same such stories regarding wedding rings if as you say they are sound bibical  doctrine?   

If it is in the church manual then it should be enforced............everywhere, not just where it is most convenient. I believe this is where the church lost it's credibility in the area.  I never said if it was right or wrong, only the facts as they stand.  Personally, I dont' have a probelm with it.  I just beieve that it does create hard feelings among those who were taught it was a matter of one's salvation, an outward show of their faith.  It does seem double minded on the part of the church.to insist that only NAD needs to dispaly this particular show of faith and obedience.  Do Hawaiians get to still eat roasted pig because it is such a huge part of their culture? 

[tinka]

We agree (smile)

Though in the church manual they basically ok'd the wedding ring on the above issues.  I felt it was wrong as with some other issues too.

[princessdi]

We may agree with the facts, as they stand., but I think we disagree with reason why the church cannot uphold this "doctrine".  I believe more of a corporate policy.  A feeble attempt to reproduce or imitate that which is supposed to begin inwardly.  As it stands now the policy only produced and lot of plain jane mean people. 

The reason they can't uphold the policy of jewelry, as they can the Sabbath is simply because it is not biblical.  They tried, and just could not support it.

[tinka]

It is pretty bad when the church does not uphold the Scripture. But what can you expect in their state when they cannot stand up to "misuse of funds" either. I have been on the inner side to witness much. So all we have left is to be right with God on an individual basis as we no longer can look to the "organized church" for all correct direction. That is why it is now dangerous time to bring in people under wrong "theology" especially for those that are followers of majority. It is better they don't know as walk away after seeing corruption within. But we are told this will happen. I am afraid it is here and expecially with justifiers that uphold it. We have been given the truth in scripture, we have been shown a last message and have disregarded. The worst class to be in is the unjust. Those that had the message, in the church and then disregarded it and led others to follow. vol. 5 T.

and so why can't they support it as the God of Heaven says that His people will not wear the gold at the worship of the golden calf. Now that is a simple understandanding and command.

[Murcielago]

So the Sabbath is both Biblical and SP, and the jewellry issue is SP and not Biblical. This begs the question, in terms of doctrine and salvational issues, how should the church define between what is Biblical; what is SP, but not Biblical; and what is neither Biblical nor SP, but is tradition? There are many churches, families and friendships that have been broken apart over the lack of broadly understood definition in these matters.

We may agree with the facts, as they stand., but I think we disagree with reason why the church cannot uphold this "doctrine".  I believe more of a corporate policy.  A feeble attempt to reproduce or imitate that which is supposed to begin inwardly.  As it stands now the policy only produced and lot of plain jane mean people. 

The reason they can't uphold the policy of jewelry, as they can the Sabbath is simply because it is not biblical.  They tried, and just could not support it.

[Bob Pickle]

The jewelry issue sure seems biblical to me, and did to preachers of multiple faiths not all that long ago.

The French Revolution marks the beginning of when jewelry wearing started becoming acceptable in Europe. It became accepted in America by the mid-1800's.

[Artiste]

Ezekiel 16:9-14

"Then I bathed you in water, washed the blood off you, and anointed you with fragrant oil. I dressed you in embroidered clothing and put fine leather sandals on your feet. I wrapped you with fine linen and covered you with silk. I adorned you with jewelry. I put bracelets on your hands and a necklace around your neck. I put a ring in your nose, earrings on your ears, and a beautiful crown on your head. You were adorned with gold and silver, while your clothing was of fine linen, silk, and embroidery. You ate the finest flour, honey, and olive oil. You became extremely beautiful and attained the position of royalty. Your fame spread among the nations because of your beauty; your beauty was perfect because of the splendor which I bestowed on you, declares the sovereign Lord."