Holiness - Pastor Woodward

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Apostolic1ness

NO

Yes. That is solid bible. To compare what woman should do and men not do. Otherwise, the comparison is irrelevant. Explain, don't just say no, otherwise.

[Apostolic1ness]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Yes. That is solid bible. To compare what woman should do and men not do. Otherwise, the comparison is irrelevant. Explain, don't just say no, otherwise.

If your trying to make the point that a man can let his hair grow down his back and simply cut or trim but keep it long is ok because he trimmed it so its considered short, the same as a woman's hair would be considered short is not "solid bible." the rules are different for men and women.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Apostolic1ness

If your trying to make the point that a man can let his hair grow down his back and simply cut or trim but keep it long is ok because he trimmed it so its considered short, the same as a woman's hair would be considered short is not "solid bible." the rules are different for men and women.

I'm not trying anything. I don't believe men should have hair down their backs. But you're wrong in what is Bible and what is not. The rules that are different are men not to have what women have. You added to the word and went beyond what it stated for men and women.

And you're too traditionalized to see it.

[Apostolic1ness]

Originally Posted by mfblume

I'm not trying anything. I don't believe men should have hair down their backs. But you're wrong in what is Bible and what is not. The rules that are different are men not to have what women have. You added to the word and went beyond what it stated for men and women.

And you're too traditionalized to see it.

please state where I added to the word.
also show me where Im too traditionalized.

why the name calling?

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Apostolic1ness

please state where I added to the word.
also show me where Im too traditionalized.

why the name calling?

Accusing someone of being Traditionalized is not name-calling. Nothing personal.

You added more than what the word said about what a man should do and what a woman should do.

All that it actually says is that a woman should "have long hair," and a man shouldn't.

You added the thought that the phrase "have long hair" for a man is different than what "have long hair" is for a woman, and the text says no such thing.

Since the Bible doesn't say that, only tradition could add that, so it shows Traditionalization.

[Apostolic1ness]

[QUOTE=mfblume;1554756]Accusing someone of being Traditionalized is not name-calling. Nothing personal.

You added more than what the word said about what a man should do and what a woman should do.

All that it actually says is that a woman should "have long hair," and a man shouldn't.

You added the thought that the phrase "have long hair" for a man is different than what "have long hair" is for a woman, and the text says no such thing.
I ADDED THE THOUGHT? GOOD ONE!
Since the Bible doesn't say that, only tradition could add that, so it shows Traditionalization.[/QUOTE

funny statement.
using your logic when you say "All that it actually says is that a woman should "have long hair," and a man shouldn't" since that is not (all) it actually says I guess you are taking away from the word of God...
silly right its the whole mote and beam thing.

[mfblume]

Show us why a man having long hair is different than a woman having long hair according to the actual text. What's in the text that tells you that?

Why does the phrase "HAVE LONG HAIR" not allow trimming it for women, but "HAVE LONG HAIR" includes trimming it for men?

[Esaias]

I wonder what the results would be if more churches spent as much effort on ensuring obedience in the areas of childhood education, "dating" and marriage, and understanding government's proper role, as they do on hair and clothing?

Well, one can dream, anyway.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Esaias

I wonder what the results would be if more churches spent as much effort on ensuring obedience in the areas of childhood education, "dating" and marriage, and understanding government's proper role, as they do on hair and clothing?

Well, one can dream, anyway.

Amen.

[houston]

Originally Posted by Esaias

I wonder what the results would be if more churches spent as much effort on ensuring obedience in the areas of childhood education, "dating" and marriage, and understanding government's proper role, as they do on hair and clothing?

Well, one can dream, anyway.

HAIR IS MORE IMPORTANT!