Episode 5
· 47:00
So welcome back. This is the very first episode in our second series. When we were trying to figure out what we wanted to talk about, we eventually landed on religious trauma. And what we mean by religious trauma is we're going be covering some pain points in the church that have contributed and continue to contribute to religious trauma. What our plan is, is to kind of give you a little bit of the history of where these things originated from.
Nick:And then fast forward to today, what kind of shape and form they're taking in the church, how they're still being used today. But then we want to do some bonus episodes and invite some guests to the episodes, maybe even have some of them do the episode themselves and co host that bonus episode and share their personal experience on how these particular things have impacted them. So we've got some good stuff coming for this series. But the very first thing that we're gonna cover, the title for today's episode is keeping up appearances. Because the main thing we want to focus on today is the church's focus on outward appearance, or more specifically, the church's focus on how appearance intersects with theology and their desire to continuously pair up how we present ourselves in church to it being a salvation issue.
Nick:So this is a problem that is not unique to the Seventh day Adventist Church. So if you hear this episode and you're a Seventh day Adventist or you're, part of another denomination, hopefully it's something that you can all relate to since it's not unique to the Seventh day Adventist Church. But because we are Seventh day Adventist, we're gonna, of course, talk about it within the context of the SDA church and SDA church history.
Orlando:Yeah. It's a spicy topic, but one that is honestly really fascinating and underreported. I I don't remember how I stumbled across the topic of of dress reform, but it's not a topic that is talked about much within mainstream Adventism. However, it is a little bit more common in your conservative or ultra conservative contexts. And it's often used or leveraged, against women to tell them, hey, you can't wear pants.
Orlando:Right? Which is so weird because, as we'll see, dress reform or the reformed dress does involve pants. So let's let's dive into the details, shall we? 06/06/1863, Ellen White had her health reform vision, and there are a lot of different points that she illuminated on, you know, in regard to diet, in regard to just general lifestyle habits. Shortly after this health reform vision, she begins to talk about clothing.
Orlando:And she talks about how much of the clothing that women were using at that time was detrimental to their health. The skirts that they were wearing, the corsets that they were wearing had a really deleterious effect on their organs. And as a result, you know, she wanted to remedy that. However, there was a particular kind of outfit that Ellen White was really against, and it was known as the American costume. The American costume was an outfit that was worn typically by, feminists at the time, women's rights advocates in the 1850s and it was also worn by certain health reformers at that time.
Orlando:And they their rationale, was that the limbs would be unencumbered. Right? They'd have sleeves. They were they could wear pants, and it's just a more practical form of clothing. So let's get into Ellen White's original, clothing commentary.
Orlando:So she describes, and this is found in first testimonies to the church, page 424 she describes the ideal dress as being one to two inches off the ground. And she also opines that even though the American costume might have health benefits, it is improper to wear because it can compromise your influence. And she's most likely talking about their spiritual influence Because if someone were to see a woman wearing pants, they would automatically think, wait a minute, you are subverting gender roles. You were trying to blur the lines between male and female. And Ellen White uses that exact same argument in that same paragraph, where she uses Deuteronomy chapter 22 verse five, which is traditionally translated as men must not wear women's clothing and women must not wear men's clothing.
Orlando:But the first part of that verse, in my opinion, has been mistranslated. And I'm not going to get into that now because that's a whole other. I could go on forever about that, but I'm not going to. But look into it for yourselves. And she also says, and again, this is, you know, the same book, First Testimonies.
Orlando:She says that those who feel called out to join the movement in favor of women's rights in the so called dress reform might as well sever all connection with the third angel's message. The spirit which attends the one cannot be in harmony with the other. The scriptures are plain upon the relations and rights of men and women. So suffice it to say, Ellen White was really against the American costume. Now what is the American costume?
Orlando:Well, to put it simply, the American costume composed of a woman wearing pants, but wearing a skirt over the pants. Now the length of the skirt could vary. With the American costume, you could have let's see. Oh, perfect. Yeah.
Orlando:Nick, you're pulling it up here. The skirt could be anywhere between mid calf. It could be up to the knee. It could be slightly above the knee. So there is a there is a spectrum when it when it came to the the style or the length of the American costume.
Orlando:And so like I said, Ellen White was against it, and what she she describes, god revealing to her that the ideal dress was to be one or two inches off the ground. Now, that changed, her opinion on that changed, in September 1864, when she and James White spent three weeks at Doctor. Jackson's Health Institute, which was called Our Home. That's what it was known as. And she got a lot of information regarding health reform ideas of that time.
Orlando:And she met an individual, by miss Austin, who was working with the physicians there, and she was wearing a modified version of the American costume. But she, as well as the other associates at the Health Institute, were were singing the praises of all of the health benefits that this modified version of the American costume, which was known as the reform dress, brought. They were like, oh, it's, it's, freeing for your limbs. It helps with circulation. These guys really they were super obsessed with blood circulation at this time.
Orlando:That was just one of the things they really harped on. And Ellen White, was hooked. She was like, wow, like, this is great. This is the dress that women need to be wearing. Adventist women need to be wearing this dress.
Orlando:Fast forward three years later, she has a vision about dress, particularly women's dress. And so I wanna read a brief description of what she saw. And so this is found in Third Selected Messages, page 267. And she says, three companies of females passed before me with their dresses as follows with respect to length. She says this about the first group of women that she saw.
Orlando:She said the first were of fashionable length, burdening the limbs, impeding the step, sweeping the street, and gathering its filth. The evil results of which I have fully stated, this class, who were slaves to fashion, appeared feeble and languid. And so she's essentially describing the typical dress of the day, the skirt going all the way to the ground, most likely wearing a corset, and then she moves on to describe the second group. She says, The dress of the second class, which passed before me, was in many respects as it should be. The limbs were well clad.
Orlando:They were free from the burdens which the tyrant fashion had imposed upon the first class, but had gone to that extreme in the short dress as to disgust and prejudice good people and destroy in a great measure their own influence. This is the style and influence of the American costume taught and worn by many at our home of Dansville, New York, the Health Institute. It does not reach the knee. I need not say that this style of dress was shown me to be too short. And then she moves on and describes the third and final group of women.
Orlando:A third class passed before me with cheerful countenance and free elastic step. Their dress was the length I have described as proper, modest, and healthful. It cleared the filth of the street and sidewalk a few inches under all circumstances, such as ascending and descending steps. And so this is the vision that she saw. She saw these three groups of women, and of course, the last one was the one that she believed that god had said, this is the model that we are to follow after.
Orlando:Now in another place where she wrote, she wrote that the skirt was to be nine inches from the floor. Now what I find interesting is that in a previous vision, she stated that the ideal dress ought to be one to two inches off the ground and that just the the general style of the American costume. And what made the American costume most offensive to the people of her day was the fact that women were wearing pants, and women wearing pants was seen as a subversion of the gender distinctive. And yet, here we have Ellen White endorsing this potential blurring of the gender distinctive.
Nick:I think what's important to note too is the context of all of this, right? Because the context of this was once again, White was shown in vision that there needs to be this distinction made right between what the genders wore, right and in the appearance that they presented. So she quotes Deuteronomy that first, right? But then like you mentioned, when she goes to our home, right to that health reform meeting, and she sees a lot of, professionals, medical professionals, health professionals dressed in that reform dress, with the pants and then with the skirt over the pants, but it was a little bit shorter. Then all of a sudden, it seemed like it wasn't that big of a deal to her, you know, like what she saw in vision as it being this, like, horrible thing.
Nick:Now she was like, oh, I see that there's more flexibility in this costume. Right? It's more it's more practical to wear this now. So it's almost like she's backtracking a little bit.
Orlando:So there were people at that time who asked Ellen White, hey, it seems like you changed your mind. Like, it's documented that people were were wondering about this. And I'll read a direct quote. Does not the practice of the sisters in wearing their dresses nine inches from the floor contradict testimony number 11, which says they should reach somewhat below the top of the lady's gator boot? Does it not also contradict testimony number 10, which says that they should clear the filth of the street an inch or two without being raised by the hand?
Orlando:And so these were questions that were being posed by fellow Adventists of the time. Some contend that what I wrote in the testimony for the church number 10 does not agree with my testimony in the work entitled How to Live. They were written from the same view, hence are not two views, one contradicting the other, as some may imagine. If there is any difference, it is simply in the form of expression. Now, do find that a little hard to reconcile, because I think there is a bit of a difference between one to two inches as opposed to nine inches, because she also says, in answers to letters of inquiry for many sisters relative to the proper length of the reformed dress, I would say that in our part of the state of Michigan, we have adopted the uniform length of about nine inches from the floor.
Orlando:I would earnestly recommend uniformity in length and would say that nine inches as nearly accords with my views of the matter as I am able to express it. So the question is, how did the Adventists of the time react to this? Well, there were some Adventists who were all for it. They're like, okay, you know, this is a message from God. We've got to hop on board.
Orlando:Right? And so, as we'll see, there were some Adventists who went a little overboard with the reform and tried to force it onto other people. And so Ellen White expresses this reality. Perhaps the most regrettable feature was the attempt by some to control others' conscience by their own. They forgot that none were to be compelled to wear the reformed dress.
Orlando:Here's another quote. With extremists, this reform seemed to constitute the stun and the substance of their religion. It was the theme of conversation and the burden of their hearts, and their minds were thus diverted from God and the truth. To those who put it on reluctantly, from a sense of duty, it became a grievous yoke. Still others, who were apparently the most zealous reformers, manifested a sad lack of order and neatness in their dress.
Nick:I wonder how she would have reacted if it didn't just blow up in her face and people just accepted it, you know, because we had like, like I said, the context of this was that she was shown in vision by God that this is basically the uniform that women are to wear. Right? That the Lord's chosen people are to wear. Then she backtracked and said, you know what? I misinterpreted this.
Nick:Maybe we can wear one that's a couple inches off the floor so that it's more sanitary. Right? So she was trying to backtrack and say, maybe it's less salvific, and it's more about being sanitary, right, and not dragging the long dresses on the floor that was filthy back then.
Orlando:You hit on something really interesting, Nick, in that you you mentioned the word uniform.
Orlando:Because she she does something interesting with the the reform dress. She equates it to the garments that Israelites had to wear.
Nick:She compares it to the to the uniform or to the outfits that the Israelites had to wear. She quotes Deuteronomy. So there's very much a theological connotation associated with this dress. It's not like the people were making it up. But it's just funny to me that when it all blew up in her face, she's like, man, I wonder why they're all so hung up on this.
Nick:And I'm like, girlfriend, I wanna know why they're so hung up on this because you literally just told them that God himself told you that this is how they should be dressing.
Orlando:Exactly. And there's not just a cultural component to this. She introduced a moral issue, as we'll see. And so let's check out what she wrote. And this is also in first Testimonies of the Church, page 524.
Orlando:So she wrote that she's essentially quoting Numbers 15, and Numbers 15 talks about how God had commanded the Israelites to wear to essentially sew blue blue tassels or a ribbon of blue onto their clothing. And that was to serve as a reminder of the 10 commandments, or really just all of the commandments that God had given to them. And it was a reminder so that they wouldn't fall back into idol worship. And with that in mind, she says, the order given by God to the children of Israel to place a ribbon of blue in their garment was to have no direct influence on their health, only as God would bless them by obedience, and the ribbon would keep in their memory the high claims of Jehovah and prevent them from mingling with other nations. God would now have his people adopt the reform dress, not only to distinguish them from the world as his peculiar people, but because a reform in dress is essential to physical and mental health.
Orlando:God's people have, to a great extent, lost their peculiarity and have been gradually patterning after the world and mingling with them until they have, in many respects, become like them. So she introduces the concept of morality for dress reform and the reform dress in the same way that this the the fringes of blue were to distinguish Israel, in the same way the reform dress was to distinguish Adventists. Now remember, she lamented the fact that there were some Adventists who were trying to compel other women to wear the reform dress. So let's see what she says about this. So despite her words regarding control, she wrote, To many, the dress reform is too simple and humbling to be adopted.
Orlando:They cannot lift the cross. God works by simple means to separate and distinguish His people from the world, but some have so departed from the simplicity of the work and ways of God that they are above the work, not in it.
Nick:So the key phrase there in relating to this dress is they cannot lift the cross. So she's using super, like, theological language here
Orlando:Yeah. What verses she's saying? Dress. Because that's an allusion to a verse. Matthew chapter 16 verse 24, and I'll read it now.
Orlando:Then Jesus said to his disciples, if anyone wants to follow after me, let him deny himself, take up his cross, and follow me. There is an element of, progress when it comes to the reform dress in the sense that women being able to wear pants was still a pretty controversial thing. Right? And so that in and of itself is progressive in nature. Right?
Orlando:As opposed to what women were being forced to wear before. Right? Long dresses, you know, corsets, and Ellen White has very negative things to say about, you know, that kind of clothing and, you know, rightfully so. So I think she does well in denouncing, you know, that kind of injurious clothing, but then she goes a little too far. And now it's like, okay, if you don't wanna get on board with this, you're not denying yourself picking up your cross and following after Jesus.
Orlando:And I think that's really one of the main issues with the dress reform.
Nick:And she could have stopped there. Right? And that would have been great. But then it's almost like she continued to push until it became a theological and salvation issue at that point, right? When she brought in a vision and, you know, quoting scripture and then alluding to the ancient Israelites, It became more of a theological issue rather than just like a, a like practical dress issue.
Nick:But yeah, so like that context is still prevalent in the church today, not just in what women wear, but in their overall appearance, right? What they wear, what kind of makeup they use, what hairstyles they use, the jewelry that they use. And I'm not saying that every church you walk into is going to be the same way, right? Obviously, the more conservative the church, the more likely that this is a type of atmosphere that you're gonna encounter. I guess, unfortunately, for me, that's just the atmosphere that I grew up in.
Nick:That was my context. Right? So that's what I was used to. So for me, like, I remember when I was working at Southern, one of my coworkers, they were doing this photo shoot for this banner. And they were doing this photo shoot, and I remember the day when the banners came up.
Nick:I went into the office and they were talking about how they had photoshopped her wedding ring out of that picture when the when they printed it on the banner. And I might add it was without her consent, like she had no idea that we're going to do this. But you know, they took the pictures. And then when she saw it on the banner, sure enough, they had photoshopped her wedding ring out. It was this obsession with let's present our image, outward appearance in a way that we're not going to cause any controversy.
Nick:Right? We're not going to cause any commotion, even though she's literally married and she's wearing her wedding ring. They photoshopped her wedding ring. And it was just this to me is this obsession with what is our outward appearance say about us, right? How are we presenting?
Nick:And one of the things that I hear a lot is the phrase a stumbling block, Cause there's really no other way to put it. It's used as a war on women, right? It's let's control how they dress, let's control their appearance, let's control everything about them so that they're not a stumbling block to the men. Since the men in the church, they haven't quite developed the capacity for self control yet. So let's put this responsibility on the women, right, completely disregarding men's role in all of this.
Nick:But then they apply this concept to everything, man. The whole don't be a stumbling block. They can apply that to sure dress in this case, but how we and how we present ourselves outwardly, just in the things we do, the things we drink, the things we eat.
Orlando:And it sounds like it can be pretty anxiety inducing. Because, I mean, think about it. If you every time, you know, you're going to make a decision about what you wear, what kind of entertainment you're going to consume, you always have to ask yourself, are there people watching me? And how will they perceive me if I'm doing these things? How will they perceive me if I wear this kind of clothing?
Orlando:How will they perceive me if I wear jewelry, how they perceive me if I go to the movie theater. And it can create, it can be a breeding ground for anxiety regarding of what other people think about me.
Nick:It's interesting how you use the word perception because it never really was about our spiritual condition, It never really was about, hey, let's focus on how is our relationship with God, right? How are we growing spiritually? How are we doing? It was never about that. It was always about perception.
Nick:Right? What will other people think? How do we appear? What kind of, you know, what kind of look are we putting on? Because I'm not saying that men are completely exempt from this whole, like, outward appearance thing.
Nick:Right? Like, I remember growing up, I would basically be forced to wear a suit and tie to church. And, man, I hated that as a little kid. You know? I hated being constricted.
Nick:And you're basically, you know, on your way to church, you're yelling with your family, you're fighting the whole car right there. But as soon as you get down, man, that suit is sharp, and boy, do you look the part. You know, you're one big happy family, and let's do this church play. Right? So I'm not saying that men are exempt from this.
Nick:We have not born the full brunt of the manipulation and the religious trauma that comes out of this outward appearance focus. So Ashley, my wife Ashley and our friend they're actually gonna co host a bonus episode together where they get to talk about their personal experience as women in the church in relation to this focus on outward appearance and jewelry and makeup and things like that. Because we can't speak to that, but I want to give them, Orlando and I both want to give them the space to be able to share their personal and firsthand experience. Right? I think from from an outside looking in, I've heard things like, you know, Doug Bachelor was somebody that I would listen to growing up, his revelation seminars.
Nick:Right? They would be used as bible studies. As an adult, I go back and listen to some of it. I'm like, what the heck is going on here? He's like comparing women who wear jewelry to like the whore of Babylon.
Nick:He's like slut shaming women for wearing jewelry and saying that, you know, this is separating them from God's people, that they're turning their jewelry into idols and are doing idol worship by wearing jewelry. It gets pretty extreme.
Orlando:Or, oh, if you you wear jewelry that you'll be perceived in a negative light, you will be giving a bad testimony of your faith. It's like, you know, you can be, a rock solid Christian, but if you're wearing some adornment or jewelry, it's as if your entire testimony just destroyed. And so I've seen people experience that and, you know, it's demoralizing, you know, for people to be judged in that way.
Nick:I did want to dive a little deeper into the whole stumbling block idea, but let's pull it up. So it's actually this verse is actually in the Bible. Romans chapter 14. Is it being used correctly?
Nick:Well, I think you can guess where I'm going with this, but let's actually read it for ourselves. So Romans chapter 14 verses 10 to 13. It says here, but why do you judge your brother or why do you show contempt for your brother for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. For it is written, as I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God. So then each of us shall give account of himself to God.
Nick:Therefore, let us not judge one another anymore, but rather resolve this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother's way. So basically people read that text and say, oh, like, you see, it's right here in the Bible, Paul is telling us that we shouldn't be creating a stumbling block, we shouldn't give our brothers a reason to fall in their faith. Right? So then they apply that to all sorts of things. They apply that to like, the type of food we eat, the way we dress, the way we talk, the music we listen to the, you know, insert reason here.
Nick:They use it as a trump card for, okay, I have this conservative, legalistic, traumatizing ideology that I can't quite pinpoint to the Bible for some reason. Like I'm pretty sure God wants this, but I can't quite prove it with Scripture. So let me just use this Bible verse as a trump card to say, there it is. Like, I don't like you listening to that type of music. That type of music is a stumbling block to me.
Nick:Like, it's gonna cause me to wander away from God. Therefore, you have to, you know, I'm gonna use this Bible verse to manipulate you essentially. Right? But literally, what is the context of this verse? So let's go, let's look at the very first verse of that chapter, Romans verse one.
Nick:It says receive one who is weak in the faith but not to dispute over doubtful things for one believes he may eat all things but he who is weak eats only vegetables. What does that mean? Someone who is weak in the faith. Right? So this is Paul talking.
Nick:And if we turn to first Corinthians chapter eight, it's another book written by Paul, same guy. And this is another place where we see the phrase stumbling block used. So let's read that real quick and we can talk more about it. But first Corinthians chapter eight verses four through 10, it says, therefore concerning the eating of things offered to idols. We know that an idol is nothing in the world, that there is no other god but one.
Nick:For even if there are so called gods, whether in heaven or on earth, as there are many gods and many lords, yet for us there is one God, the Father, of are all things, and we for him and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we live. However, there is not in everyone that knowledge for some with consciousness of the idol until now eat at it as a thing offered to an idol and their conscious being weak. So there again, we're using the word, the word weak is used is defiled, but food does not commend us to God for neither if we eat, are we the better, nor if we do not eat, are we the worse. But beware lest somehow this liberty of yours becomes one a stumbling block to those who are weak. So he's using that phrase again here.
Nick:If for if anyone sees you have knowledge eating an idol's temple, will not the conscious of him who is weak be emboldened to eat those things offered to idols? So let's break this down. The context of when this was written, this is the early Christian church. And by early Christian church, mean like early Christian church, like people were still alive when Jesus was alive on earth. Right?
Nick:So the context in world history and in that particular part of the world is that the Jews and the early Christians were pretty much the only monotheists in the area. In other words, they believed in one God. Right? But most of their religions around them were polytheistic, which means they believed in many gods, right? Not monotheistic like one God.
Nick:So the context is, okay, there's this new convert to the Christian faith. They grew up in this culture, in this area where they're surrounded by gods. They're surrounded by temples to these false gods, to these idols, and this is what they see on a daily basis. Right? This is the kind of culture that they grew up in.
Nick:So he was saying that we know, like, I could eat meat sacrificed to an idol, and that's not gonna and that's not going to determine my salvation. Right? Like, can eat meat sacrificed to idols because I know that idols aren't a thing. Like, they're false gods. Right?
Nick:They're they're not real. So it's not like I'm worshiping another god because this other god doesn't exist. That's kind of the the, like, point that he's trying to make here. Right? But then he says, what about the person that was just converted that came out of that culture or that environment, that polytheistic environment?
Nick:If they see me eating food sacrificed to idols, then they may think that there's not a problem with doing this or that we can continue to worship those idols, right, and not worship the one true God. So all of this long winded explanation is to say that the context of don't be a stumbling block is Paul talking to fellow believers that were, you know, already part of the Christian church and how they should relate to new converts to the faith. That yes, you don't wanna be a stumbling block because they are they haven't been established in the faith. That's what he means by the word those who are weak. It's just new Christians, new people that have joined the faith, new converts.
Nick:But today, when people use the phrase, don't be a stumbling block, they're always basically saying, like, don't be a stumbling block to this person has been in the church for their entire life and has a very conservative and legalistic ideology. They don't they don't feel comfortable with you wearing earrings in church. So Paul said, don't be a stumbling block. Therefore, let me use this as a tool to manipulate you into compliance. Right.
Nick:But what do you think Orlando? Is there anything that I missed on that or anything you want to add to the whole stumbling block discussion?
Orlando:No. I think that context makes all the difference. Right? Because you have individuals who have just joined Christianity. They've come out of a worldview where they believe that, you know, multiple gods can exist to where there's just one god.
Orlando:Right? And they they come in, and Paul is telling you, hey. You know, be be understanding. Be be sensitive. Right?
Orlando:Because they're not spiritually mature. Right? When Paul uses the word weak, that's essentially a synonymous for spiritually immature. Right? And they have every right to be spiritually immature because they are what Paul calls babies in Christ.
Orlando:Right? They are still taking in, you know, the the milk, so to speak, of the word of God. Right? The the really simple things. And so I think the whole idea that Paul is trying to come, trying to convey is, you know, at first, it makes sense to try to be, you know, sensitive to, you know, how their previous culture may have influenced them.
Orlando:Right? But eventually, you stop trying to remove all the stumbling blocks. Right? You know, there was an article that really, put it a good way. They say that when an infant is learning to walk, you clear a path so their feet won't stumble.
Orlando:Right? You hold out your hands to catch, you know, the baby, you know, should they fall. But you wouldn't for the rest of your life clear every path and hold out your hands in front of them. Because I mean, that'd be ridiculous. But the way in which many Christians have interpreted this verse, it's essentially just that.
Orlando:Like, we now have to cater to the the cultural and psychological associations that people have for, like, the rest of their lives. And so we're really beholden to the person who has the most sensitive conscience, a person who has the most conservative or reactionary tendencies. Right?
Nick:I like that because in this I feel like the whole sensitive consciousness thing was putting it way too nicely. But yeah.
Orlando:But, essentially, we're beholden to them. They kind of take the church hostage. It's, hey. Yeah. I have this cultural or psychological association against jewelry, against a certain kind of clothing, and now you have to cater to me, to my cultural taste, to my spiritual tastes.
Orlando:And that is not only manipulation, it's selfish. And selfishness is really the antithesis of the fruit of the spirit. And so we have a lot of members, who, you know, they they may not be doing this consciously, but they are exhibiting a a spirit of manipulation and selfishness by leveraging a bad understanding of stumbling block in order to cater to their cultural and spiritual preferences.
Nick:And I think yeah. That that's really well put. And I think what bothers me the most about this is the whole, like I'm not saying that, you know, this is a free for all now. Right? And you and, like, nothing matters.
Nick:Let's throw all reason out the window. But it's like, man, like, this text is not a trump card, a blank check for manipulation like the article put it, right? But that's how it's used. The practical application, it's a weaponization of scripture. It's being used as a blank check for manipulation.
Nick:And that's what really bothers me, is that the context of this, it's much more gospel oriented. It's much more beautiful. It's, hey, let's actually, let's be considerate about the new converts. Let's not judge them, you know, and be considerate with how we act around them as they come into the faith for the first time. At the end of the day, it's not God who decides how we should behave.
Nick:It's it's not scripture. It's not sola scriptura, but it's what's the lowest threshold for what I can do in this church. And they dictate what the Lord says. Like they dictate what, what a Christian should do, wear say, you know, listen to and everything. And that's what I have a problem with.
Orlando:And I think it's so fascinating that, you know, Paul has no problems demanding mature behavior of those that he expects to be mature. I mean, do you remember when Paul called out Peter for playing favorites? He was like, Peter, what are you doing? You, you're you're comfortable hanging out with gentiles, and that's great. But whenever Jews are around, you avoid gentiles.
Orlando:Like, yo, that's messed up. That's racism. And Paul has no problem calling out Peter. And so Paul illustrates that you can call, you know, call people out when the time is right, not based on cultural preferences, but on actual biblical issues.
Nick:Yeah. And I think that one of the things that we're gonna continue to harp on in this podcast is sola scriptura. In the first series that we covered on Ellen White and Adventism, if you haven't heard it, definitely go back on our YouTube channel and watch those. But it was about sola scriptura. Right?
Nick:What does scripture say? It's the same thing here. Right? But it's not just like, what do I think scripture says? Or like, what does my eisegesis tell me so that I can most easily weaponize scripture against you?
Nick:But it's what was the context of these things? How was this bible verse supposed to be applied? And I think a a really good one to end on is Matthew 23 Because we saw what Paul says about this subject, but let's see what Jesus himself says about this subject. Right? So Matthew 23, and we're just gonna read two verses here at 23 verses twenty seven and twenty eight.
Nick:So the context of this, the subheader for this section is woe to the scribes and Pharisees. So this is Jesus speaking himself about the Pharisees. Right? And it says here, Matthew 23, twenty seven and twenty eight, woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, for you are like white washed tombs, which indeed appear beautiful outwardly, but inside are full of dead men's bones and all uncleanness or uncleanness. Even so, you also outwardly appear righteous to men but inside you're full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.
Nick:And okay, so what's the context of this? The context of this is Jesus is talking about a group of people who wanted to make sure that they ticked all the boxes on what one is supposed to look like. Right? What a follower of God, a godly person is supposed to look like, how they're supposed to present themselves outwardly. And they like were perfectly dressed and they looked like they were righteous.
Nick:Like Jesus says here, they were righteous to men, but they are whitewashed tombs. They looked pretty on the outside, but inside it was just dead men's bones. They were rotting on the inside. And I think what this is showing here is that Jesus was making a point that it's actually not the outward appearance that Christ is worried about, but it's our hearts, the inner self versus the outward appearance. Right?
Nick:Because we can check all the boxes as to, like, what we think a perfect Christian should look like, what they should speak like or listen to or eat or whatever. Right? Like, let's check of all these boxes. But they could be misrepresenting Christ with how they treat others. They could be pushing people away from the church, but with being judgmental, you know, straight out the gate because they're more concerned about perception than they are with this person's relationship with God.
Nick:And I think that's really what we want to leave you all with is that at the end of the day, you know, well, just like in the Old Testament when David was gonna be chosen king, we were told that while men look at the outward appearance, God looks at the heart. So I think that that's definitely what I wanna leave you all with. But is there anything that else that you wanna add, Orlando, before we go?
Orlando:No. I think you summed it up well. Yeah. I think for far too long, Christianity, particularly Adventism, there has been a hyperfixation on keeping up appearances, making sure that the outside is all taken care of. Oh, I'm vegetarian.
Orlando:I don't go to the movies. I don't wear jewelry. And, man, none of those things really matter. You know? Like, it's you don't you just don't find those things or principles that lead to those things in in the bible.
Orlando:And we have to go back to sola scriptura.
Orlando:See what it says for yourself. And, and more importantly, analyze what is the framework that you are bringing to reading the bible. Because you'll have a lot of these individuals who, you know, they're extremely judgmental, you know, in regard to clothing, lifestyle, habits, and they think that they are in the right. Like, they they believe that their reading of scripture is correct. It's airtight.
Orlando:And what causes them to think that is their hermeneutic. In other words, the rules that they use to understand scripture. And I think it's good for everyone on an occasional basis to evaluate, okay, why do I read the bible the way that I do? Why do I understand it the way that I do? And it's this this continual reflection, you know, taking an audit of ourselves and how we understand the bible that can help us to, be more in line and, be more Christ like.
Listen to Reconstructing using one of many popular podcasting apps or directories.