Quote:
Originally Posted by Newman
BP- Not trying to pick on you; but to better understand where you are coming from....
Where is the benefit? How does uncut hair:
1. Benefit a woman's walk with God?
2. Benefit the church?
3. Benefit society?
4. Benefit the church's witness?
Curious...  |
Sis...I have answered that 20 times if I have answered it once. You don't agree with me on ANY ONE SINGLE POINT. I still have great respect for you, and value the thoughts you bring to bear on the subject. I have no desire, nor do I have the time to debate this. I just couldn't let the "magic hair" thing pass. It's bogus. I think you agree with me on this.
I will just restate in summary what I have many times said. Long hair on a woman looks more feminine and does not detract from her beauty. It tends away from some of the "gender-mixing" and "outlandish styles" that many of the modern styles bring the bear. (That does not mean that it totally eradicates them.) Our ladies stand out, and the beauty of their hair has a very wonderful attraction--and not just to them in a sensual manner....although long hair can be used that way. I have never seen a woman that I thought looked better with short hair than she did with long. But, I have seen plenty that with their long hair and no makeup, looked better than with short hair AND makeup. That is but a personal opinion, and personal taste. I don't expect agreement in this area.
I think that are ladies are impressive when they do their hair in nice fashion, but not outlandlishly--and I think their dedication to God shines through. My opinion again.
I think that society was much less encumbered with open sin before ladies began to follow after more modern fashions in cutting the hair, and wearing pants. I DO NOT say that this is the cause, but merely a symptom begetting more symptoms. If cut hair and pants were the only issues we had to deal with--then preachers could rest easy. They often seem to run along with more problematic issues--but that is certainly not a rule without NUMEROUS exceptions on both sides of the issue.
Yes--I'm more liberal than most conservatives on this, and more conservative than most "liberals" on this...but I am just stating where I am and where I am coming from.
And, this is not intended to pick back. I appreciate the many debates that you and I have both enjoined--and I am the better for them. Interpreted, if I am not as strict on this issue as I once was--I suppose that Newman can be said to bear part of the blame!!!!
Threaded Mode
