Conviction?

[ThriftFabulous]

My mil says she is convicted to wear only skirts, not cutting hair, no jewelry, make up ect. She also believes in healers and profacies, speaking in tongues. I do not believe this. How was she convicted of this? I don't believe I will go to hell for wearing pants, makeup, jewelry, cutting my hair. Ect. She says she is holiness. I guess I would be baptist.

 

[Cappadocious]

How was she convicted of this? I don't believe I will go to hell for wearing pants, makeup, jewelry, cutting my hair. Ect.

Holiness Pentecostals told it to her but it is not true. They teach that to be set aside as God's holy one you have to dress and act like people did in Little House on the Prairie. They need more St. Paul.

People feel all kinds of things and think they are convicted but you have to test the spirits by their fruits.

 

[Dave-W]

You MIL definitely sounds like she is in a congregation that is Wesleyan Holiness in background. (hopefully NOT from the UPC stream)

Just remember that one of the features / quirks of the New Covenant is that sin can be based on faith: "Whatever is not done from faith is a sin." Rom 14.23b

So for her to wear pants would definitely be sinful; not because wearing pants is sin, but because she could not do it in faith. The same goes for makeup, jewelry, hair length, skirt length, etc. To get her to change that would take convincing her at a heart level that God is not putting on that restriction. To try to get her to change WITHOUT that heart change is asking her to commit a sin. (but the sin is one of lack of faith, not the action itself)

 

[chapmic]

It was faith in God that convicted her, she heard/read the bible and believed. She doesn't have to wear only skirts and not wear jewelry etc, but if she wants to honor Jesus through those actions then that is ok.

 

[Albion]

Hi, ThriftFabulous.

It is possible that the MIL picked up all those ideas simply from her reading of Scripture, but because she describes herself as "Holiness," which is a particular movement within Christian history or, alternately, the name of a group of Christian churches that follow that POV, I think she must have been tutored to believe those things you are asking about.

 

[Greg J.]

It's amazing how such a simple thing can be involved with so much truth (or lack thereof). People can believe what your mother-in-law does for many reasons, such as having been hurt, not believing in exegesis, or because God actually wants her to. One could investigate whether her conviction from God or something else (if she were willing).

It's never our job to tell someone what they ought to believe. If they are willing to listen, we can share what we believe and why. Rather, since this is not a core issue for a right relationship with Jesus Christ, we can be loving, supportive, and encouraging. These would have a far more beneficial effect on her than resisting her on a disputable matter. (Romans 14:1) This is even sometimes even the case when what she believes is a core matter and she is sinning from your perspective. God himself does not expect us to stop all sinning all at once (because we can't), but rather tends to work on us one or a few issues at a time. Imagine what it would be like if someone pointed out all the sinful things you were doing expecting you to stop them all immediately. It would be extremely oppressive (and not from God).

God sometimes wants people to be faithful in certain things that are not Scriptural commands because it is something they can do. Their faithfulness to God is what is important and they will be rewarded for it. I can't think of a single example in Scripture of God rebuking or correcting someone for something they thought was a way of being faithful to Him. Rather He meets them at their point of need and points them in the right direction (when they're already trying to head toward God).

We can always pray for them regularly. However, sometimes it is our perspective that God ends up changing.

 

[Cappadocious]

not believing in exegesis

?

 

[Greg J.]

The process of coming to understand a passage of Scripture is sometimes divided into two processes. First an exegetical study is done to try to understand what the writer meant in a passage to his intended audience—people who the writer knew something about. From this we may be able to see that the writer was applying principles to say what he did. If we can identify those principles then a later step in the process (hermeneutics) could identify how those principles might apply to us today.

For example:

I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God. (1 Timothy 2:9-10, 1984 NIV)

If the historical information were available, we might discover the exact meaning of having braided hair in that culture, but this verse doesn't tell us, other than to use it as an example of immodesty. Depending on one's result of exegesis, they might conclude that Paul meant women shouldn't ever wear their hair in a sexually provocative way whether it was with braided hair or some other hair style.

A different result might be that the women who were braiding their hair were using expensive hair dye, and Paul meant that neither males nor females should be presenting themselves ostentatiously in church. (I made up both these examples.)

The idea is simply that if we don't understand what speaker/writer meant to the person he was talking to, we can't understand how his words might apply to us today. Presumably the admonition against braided hair was cultural and it is not a command about braiding hair in present day America, because braiding hair these days doesn't have a morally good or evil meaning, or a pro-God or anti-God effect.

There's people who devote their lives to exegesis of Biblical text, so who's exegesis we choose to believe can make a big difference in how we understand Scripture. Fortunately, much of Scripture holds the same meaning for us as it did to those thousands of years ago. (e.g., "Do not murder.")

 

[Cappadocious]

The process of coming to understand a passage of Scripture is sometimes divided into two processes. First an exegetical study is done to try to understand what the writer meant in a passage to his intended audience—people who the writer knew something about. From this we may be able to see that the writer was applying principles to say what he did. If we can identify those principles then a later step in the process (hermeneutics) could identify how those principles might apply to us today.

That is a use of the term hermeneutics which is totally novel to me. To me, any step prior to hermeneutical application is not possible even if one tried it.

 

[Greg J.]

Yes, formal definitions of both my use of exegesis and hermeneutics are broader. However, they do get used the way I have. I am not familiar with better terms, or I would use them.

 

[Dave-W]

If the historical information were available, we might discover the exact meaning of having braided hair in that culture, but this verse doesn't tell us, other than to use it as an example of immodesty. Depending on one's result of exegesis, they might conclude that Paul meant women shouldn't ever wear their hair in a sexually provocative way whether it was with braided hair or some other hair style.

Or to go a step further - what is meant by "immodest?" In this context it has nothing to do with sexuality but with flaunting riches.

 

[woman4jesus]

Thank you. What I meant is I've never felt those convictions. I only once felt conviction and it was when I got saved 14 years ago. I meant to say what does it feel like when someone is convicted?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[woman4jesus]

I also wanted to clarify I don't want to change her beliefs. Those are hers. I just don't want us to butt heads when we do see/speak to each other.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ac28]

Holiness can only be derived from our position in Christ Jesus and how we identify, in our minds, with what He has done. There is nothing we can do through our own merits that can achieve even a smidgin of holiness.