Rings and Things

• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

[LONG MESSAGE WARNING]
Here is the mandatory creed inclusion for those who need it.

1. I believe that true holiness is a condition that originates in the
sould and flows from within to without.

2. I believe God looks on the heart, and does not condemn man in his
ignorance or inability.

3. I believe that the program of salvation is to provide a means for
restoring that which is lost, and that only God knows and has means to
impart the needed elements. That is, a sinner needs the blood, and not
the letter of the law when he comes to God.

Now, lets add some statements that many might not demand of me:

1a. True holiness is incmplete and powerless unless it ultimately
comprehends every aspect of life which is within the dominion of the
soul. Heart, mind, and soul. Hands Feet and lips, inside, and outside.
Action, Disposition and Appearance. Until reaching these dimensions,
God's holiness has touched what God has purposed for His children,

2a. God does hold every individual responsible for those things that
he has put in man's power through deliverance, and through the world.
Concerning aborted babies and retarded people, we have we said, God is
merciful and will treat everything just right. On that basis, I would
rather be an igorant sinner found in judgement than a disobedient
Christian. Think about that.

3a. The word of God is a means for the actual restoration, in this
present world, of lost humanity and all its dominion.  Application of
the WORD is absolutely essential to making such restoration for it is
the soul and mind which is to be renewed and made conformable. If the
WORD is rejected after an initial experience with the blood, the
individual is rejecting salvation, and stands in judgement. 

4. Pastors and other ministries in the church ARE God's means to deal
with flesh, and when pastoral ministry and anointed teaching of the
word is rejected, God does NOT have to provide alternative means of
communicating with man, nor is he likely to. It is at this juncture
that the mercy of God can begin to manifest itself in curses, such as
sickeness and trouble to brings a person to submission and ultimately
under the transforming power of the WORD, through ones own volition.
God CAN but does NOT normally violate the dominion of human will as
regards the individal soul - translation: you can be lost by neglect
and carelessness.

Now, with that in mind, for your perusal is one man's teaching on
"Rings and Things". This is probably a point of view that you will not
hear readily these days and right here, so consider it a priviledge.
You may not agree, but, you may be wrong :)

-----
THE QUESTION OF RINGS
by DANIEL MENA

The subject of jewelry, which includes all ornaments, even rings, must
be approached first of all with a sweet spirit. Truth never has to
lower itself to a hard or unkind approach. Truth always manifests the
fruit of the Spirit; one of which is gentleness. One of the proofs of
Truth is the kind and Christ-like spirit it portrays. lt does not
return railing for railing because it is the nature of him who, when
he was reviled, he reviled not again.

I would like to begin this article with a quote from Bro. James
Kilgore, the Assistant General Superintendent of the United
Pentecostal Church.
	
"As to the origination of rings, history says that they
were worn as ornaments on the fingers, in the ears, in the nose, and
around the wrists and ankles.  I would have to conclude that wearing
jewelry is not really the image or the ornament of a Christian
Spirit."

There are good folks who try to contend that the wedding ring is not
classified as jewelry. If rings are not jewelry, then why must a
person go to a jewelry store or jewelry department to purchase them?
Ask any sinner if rings are considered jewelry; they will answer in
the affirmative. Almost every dictionary in the land will define rings
under the category of jewelry. World Book Encyclopedia, page 95 under
jewelry states, "Jewelry includes:  rings, bracelets, necklaces,
earrings, brooches, and various ornaments for the hair." In no
instance in Holy Scripture, neither by priest, prophet or apostle, was
the marriage vows solemnized by the putting on of a ring. God
performed the first wedding in the garden of Eden, and no where can we
find that he married Adam and Eve with rings. If it did not originate
in the scriptures, then where did it come from? The editor of the
Daily Tribune, Bay City, Texas, wrote on page 10, in the June 22, 1962
edition: Re "Wedding Rings" - The romantic tradition of giving a ring
stems from what seems to be a barbaric custom. - The author then
credited Pope Innocent the 3rd as the originator of the wedding ring,
in the celebration of marriage in the church.

The Apostle Paul in his discourse on marriage, never made mention
about rings being used to symbolize the marriage ordinance. Neither
Paul or any other Apostle taught or advocated the wearing of jewelry
for any occasion, but, you would almost think by the strong,
gospel-like stand some men take in defence of this type of
ornamentation, that they had. Do we have any Biblical support for this
custom? The answer is NO! You would almost think there was a Romans
17:1, reading something like this: "I the Apostle Paul, have received
another commandment from the Lord, that when you are married, you put
on rings to show the world you are married." Neither Jesus, or his
disciples ever taught the wearing of a wedding ring.

You say, "l don't wear a wedding ring, but my wife does. "Why don't
you?" Some could interpret what you are saying as to mean; "l don't
want men looking at my wife - but I don't mind if women look at me as
being available." If this is not the case, could it be that down
inside your heart you are convicted that it is wrong, and would feel
totally uncomfortable with one on? The Bride of Christ, in the book of
Revelation did not wear a ring to show she was a bride. She wore fine
linen, clean and white; which was the righteousness of the Saints.
However, the great whore, who was drunk with the blood of the saints,
was decked with gold, precious stones and pearls.

God has taught us a very true yet painful lesson that cost us men and
time. The battle did not have to take as long as it did, but some
within our ranks were still afraid to drive the sword into Agag. Even
today, there are places where the sniper fire can still be heard on
the fringes. The lesson God had to teach us was, "Godly Consistency" -
in other words, you have no voice, no volume, no momentum to preach
against T.V. if you preach on T.V. or advertise on it. You have lost
the case through the legal loophole of inconsistency. I am afraid we
are coming to another battlefield where we must learn the same
principle, only through another issue. You have no power, authority,
strength or credibility to preach against jewelry if you still allow
certain kinds in the church. Your consistency will be challenged. T.V.
is either all wrong or all right. Time has proven - you cannot
compromise with the Devil. If you are not 100% against it, in time,
you will be 100% for it. You cannot remain static, the overwhelming
pressure will pull you like a vacuum. Naturally speaking, the tree
always falls in the direction it leans. Someone said . . .

Vice is a monster of so frightful mien, as to be hated 	needs but to
be seen, yet seen too oft, familiar with her face, we first endure,
then pity, them embrace.

You cannot allow wedding rings in the church and ever win the battle
against jewelry. If we are blind to our own state of inconsistency,
the world is not. We have joined hands with ROME, in using a
Biblically condemned ornament to symbolize God ordained ordinance.

Let's be honest with ourselves. The same scriptures that we use to
preach against earrings, bracelets and necklaces, also condemn rings.
If you are going to make an exception to God's rule and accept one as
being justified and right, then fairness and consistency demand you
accept all as alright. Some have pulled their finger out of the dike
and wonder why the world is coming in. Remember!, T.V. almost took us
into the SEA!

. . . wedding band yes, but engagement ring no! Why not? You have got
just as much scripture to allow the engagement ring as the wedding
ring. If reason is placed in the judgement seat and allowed a louder
voice than scripture, you must be fair. Well, where do you draw the
line? Yes, that is what everyone is asking.

Listen. . . FRIENDSHIP RING stands up to present her case. Oh! it is
emotional and as moving as the engagement ring. Next. . . COLLEGE
CLASS RING; the debate is hot and heavy, but due to much research and
scholarship and remembering the long hours of study and mental
discipline, he has won reason over to his right to exist and live in
the camp of the redeemed. Next. . . standing in the long court aisle
is MR. TIE CLASP with a bulging briefcase of reasons and arguments.
Next. . . Oh yes! MR. CUFF LINK and MRS. BETTY BROOCH and behind them
the door opens and ALAS! the hallway is filled, down the steps and out
into the street. . . NECKLACES, BRACELETS, EARRINGS, ANKLE BRACELETS,
PINS, TRINKETS, NOSE RINGS, GLISTENING PEARLS, SPARKLING DIAMONDS, and
GLITTERING JEWELS of all manner from New York, Paris, London, Africa,
India, Europe and Asia; they all want entry into the Church of the
Living God. Remember, they are all relatives; if you let mother in,
she will pull in the whole family sooner or later. The next generation
will use our "exception" (compromise) as their license and the wind
will become the whirlwind.

BUT LISTEN . . .

LET HISTORY HAVE HER SAY!

"Rings Through The Ages" - Author James McCarthy devotes an entire
chapter to the practice of "Dactyliomancy." This is the practice of
divination by means of finger rings.  He further states, ASTROLOGY,
CRYSTALLOMANCY, SORCERY, NECROMANCY, CONJURATION, INCANTATION and
ENCHANTMENT were all part of this practice.

Margaret Blake in her book "Wedding Customs and Folklore," states
"Wedding rings are also important in divination."

"The Wedding Day in All Ages and Countries" - author Edward Wood,
writes - "The Christian church doubtless adopted the wedding ring from
the pagans of Italy, as a convenient sign of marriage." He further
states, "The Quakers reject the use of a ring in their weddings
because of its heathenish origin, and during the time of the
Commonwealth, the Puritans endeavored to abolish the use of the
wedding ring, for the reason that it was of pagan invention." On page
221 he writes, "In Ireland the use of a gold ring is superstitiously
required." The author quotes from the old Salisbury Manual on page
219, as to the purpose of the third finger being selected for the
ring. The bridegroom was to receive the ring from the priest, then
holding the right hand of the bride, he was to say, "With this ring I
thee wed." He was then to place the ring on her left-hand thumb, and
say, "In the name of the Father"; then on the first finger, and say,
"And the Son," then on the second finger, and say, "And the Holy
Ghost," and finally on the third finger, and say, "Amen," where it was
to remain.

Some holiness people will denounce rings worn on the ears as worldly
and sinful, and rightfully so; but let a woman remove the two gold
rings from her ears and place them on the third finger of her left
hand and they now conclude it as acceptable. In other words, gold
rings worn on the ears are a sin but by being transferred to the
finger, it ceases to become sin. Is it just the location on the body
that determines the sin? Someone says, "I'm embarrassed not to wear a
ring, I'm afraid someone will think I am living in adultery." What do
you wear to prove to the world that you are a Christian?(Bride of
Christ). You say, "Nothing, my life and my testimony show the world
that I am a Christian." The same should hold true in a marriage. Two
people should live in such respectable fidelity that the world can
tell by their conduct that they are married and if there is ever a
question, wouldn't their marriage license settle all doubt? Remember
also, in Luke 2:1-7, God didn't care what the world thought about Mary
being with child. In our present generation, thousands of unmarried
common-law couples wear rings which actually prove nothing.

If you can truthfully say you see nothing wrong with an engagement and
wedding ring, then prove it to yourself by this simple test. Attach
your wife's engagement ring and wedding ring to each of her ears and
then let her sing a solo behind the pulpit on Sunday night. You say,
"I could never do that. . . Why? You say, . . . it becomes jewelry
then." If they don't convict you as being wrong then the location
should not matter. I Timothy 2:9, says, "That the women adorn
themselves, - not with gold. '' The scripture does not make allowance
for any special location. You say, "It's the reason behind it that
causes me to accept the wedding ring and reject the earring." My
friend, let me kindly ask you one question; is the reason based on
Scripture or Custom? When Custom comes into conflict with scripture,
which do we obey? The Apostles said, "We ought to obey God rather than
men."

Child of God, can't you see we are dealing with a major principle and
not a minor issue? For too many years customs have blindfolded us to
consistent Bible Holiness. We have taken a scripturally condemned
ornament and used it as a symbol for a Biblical ordinance. This is
confusion twice confounded. The prophet said, "The customs of the
heathen are vain."

Some say, "You are wanting to destroy my marriage when you preach
against wedding rings." The beautiful God-given ordinance of marriage
was around thousands of years before Pope Innocent Ill decreed every
couple should wear a ring, it is a love for God and each other that
keeps the marriage together, not a ring.

I Corinthians 14: 37, If any man think himself to be a prophet, or
spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you
are the commandments of the Lord. What was one of the commandments of
the Apostle Paul? I Tim. 2:9, That women adorn themselves --not with
GOLD. Who among us is spiritual enough to change that commandment? 1
Peter 3:3, Let it not be the outward adorning of -- wearing of gold
--. Deuteronomy 7:25, -- thou shalt not desire the silver or gold that
is ON THEM, nor take it unto thee, lest thou be snared therein; for it
is an ABOMINATION to the Lord thy God. Numbers 31:50, "We have
therefore brought an oblation for the Lord, what every man hath
gotten, of jewels of gold, chains, and bracelets, rings, earrings, and
tablets, to make an atonement for our souls before the Lord."

Some have fallen into the ditch of the "Impossible Choice", they will
say, "l would rather have my ring than a bad spirit." You cannot
choose the lesser of two wrongs and come out right. We must stand
against jewelry with a sweet yet firm spirit. You will never make the
weak strong by weakening the strong. I quote from Elder B.E. Echols
tract, "The jewelry controversy", Page 2, "And when the people heard
these evil tidings (of verse 30) they MOURNED (and some church folks
today do a lot of mourning, grumbling, or complaining when they think
they may have to part with those dear wedding-bands, golden cuff
buttons and flashy tie clasps, secret society rings and pins, etc.);
and no man did put on his ornaments." This is exactly how it should be
with us Pentecostal believers today. God does not want His holy people
decked with jewelry LIKE THE WORLD (Tit. 2:11-14 with I Tim. 2:7-9)
AND THE DEVIL (Ezekiel 28:11-15). If our old pioneers preached like
that; should we not listen and take heed? Years ago I sat and listened
as Sis. S.G. Norris, told about a time in the early days of Pentecost
when the Spirit of the Lord moved upon her. She related that during a
worship service she reached down and pulled off her expensive wedding
ring and put it in the missionary offering. Is this not what happened
to Israel in Exodus 35:22? "And they came, both men and women, as many
as were willing hearted, and brought bracelets, and earrings, and
rings, and tablets, all jewels of gold: and every man that offered an
offering of gold unto the Lord." 

Thousands of people observed as the beautiful "Spirit of Holiness
(Rom. 1:4) swept the final service of the General Conference of the
United Pentecostal Church, October 4, 1981 in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.
After a stirring message by Bro. James Kilgore touching on the subject
of sacrificing for the Gospel's Sake; numerous Gold Wedding Rings and
Diamonds were removed and consecrated to be sold to send missionary
families across the world to preach the Gospel. With this beautiful
spirit, we can evangelize the world before Jesus Comes."	

. . . let us lay aside every weight and the sin which doth so easily
beset us,. . .Heb. 12:1

. . . press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God
in Christ Jesus. Ph. 3:14

-------------

Me again...
Do I condemn the wearer of a ring ? No. (Actually some of our people
still, after a WHOLE YEAR, wear some jewelry. Even "ear rings". You
know why ? Cause Im dealing with it the way God tells me too... with
patience. God called someone to pastor you too. I pray you listen to
him, knowing what rsponsibility is on his soul) 

But I WISH and PRAY that people could look beyond their carnal,
quibbling over whether it is a "salvation issue" long enough to hear
ANYTHING of substance. We had better be careful when they start to
find that EVERY holiness standard that the church has found victory in
becomes an argument. The REASON for the arguments is simple... the
flesh says "I dont want to" and the mind goes to work with the
appearance of seeming spiritual on all sorts of excuses.

I think you can be saved in a tank top and hot pants, or worse.. But
Im not real sure that those who always debate on the side of how BAD
and unspiritual  the church and the old time victorious ministry is
are really saved at all. :)

---- Thanks probably due to AIS for the text file which is in wide
circulation.


p.s. By the way, this whole thing has become a serious sore.. I know
of carnal preachers who have come to preach in churches where holiness
standards are hardly ever mentioned who have taken the liberty to take
a "jewlery offering".. 

This is NOT what happened in the instance cited above (1981 Gen
Conference), but a very SAD reflection on the way that those who are
unlearned become a target for those who are not right in their
spirits, but are powerful in the word. The congregation was rightly
moved to conviction by a capable someone who then, wrongly... took
their money. 

This could have all been avoided by PROPER UNDERSTANDING.

As to the people, dont worry.. they gave as unto the Lord and will be
blessed. As to the preacher who did that ? God will deal with him,
have NO doubts, and believe me, you don't want to be anywhere nearby.
But these people would have given rightly into their own local church,
and the work of God would have been prospered in a beautful spirit of
sacrifice and love. How sad that such an opportunity was perverted.

Let me tell you, PROPER UNDERSTANDING does NOT come by debating every
little thing that the flesh has problems with.

-mwb