Submission? Or Power and Control?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by ILG

Okay, no, that isn't wrong-for real sin. But they set this foundation for a woman cutting her hair. Do you think that is right?

I haven't read the book (and honestly don't intend to) so I can't even say what the book is about. Speaking strictly about hair issues, if one believes cutting hair is an abominable sin, it only makes sense to establish first of all that sin = death in the lake of fire.

I don't get upset if someone is consistently wrong. If you told me everything I believe is going to send me to hell for eternity, I am not going to take umbrage at how "uncharitable" your presentation was because it "makes me uncomfortable" or because "you are trying to scare me". I just look at "is this data scripturally accurate, or not" and take it from there. If a person is being hypocritical, trying to scare me while simultaneously complaining about other people's scare tactics, I may point it out, or I may just move on and not waste time with an irrational twit.

Not saying you are being an irrational twit. Just want to be clear on that.

As for hair cutting being a damnable sin, I think sisters need to worry more about getting their glory under wraps. Yes, that was a pun.

[ILG]

Originally Posted by Esaias

I haven't read the book (and honestly don't intend to) so I can't even say what the book is about. Speaking strictly about hair issues, if one believes cutting hair is an abominable sin, it only makes sense to establish first of all that sin = death in the lake of fire.

I don't get upset if someone is consistently wrong. If you told me everything I believe is going to send me to hell for eternity, I am not going to take umbrage at how "uncharitable" your presentation was because it "makes me uncomfortable" or because "you are trying to scare me". I just look at "is this data scripturally accurate, or not" and take it from there. If a person is being hypocritical, trying to scare me while simultaneously complaining about other people's scare tactics, I may point it out, or I may just move on and not waste time with an irrational twit.

Not saying you are being an irrational twit. Just want to be clear on that.

As for hair cutting being a damnable sin, I think sisters need to worry more about getting their glory under wraps. Yes, that was a pun.

The only thing that really concerns me is when teachings hurt people. You didn't outright answer my question though. Are women who cut their hair sinning in your opinion?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by ILG

The only thing that really concerns me is when teachings hurt people. You didn't outright answer my question though. Are women who cut their hair sinning in your opinion?

Depends on the motivation. A woman who cut her hair because she needed surgery on her skull is one thing. But a woman who cut her hair because she's gonna do what she wants and who cares what the Bible says about it has got bigger problems than scissors.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by ILG

The only thing that really concerns me is when teachings hurt people. You didn't outright answer my question though. Are women who cut their hair sinning in your opinion?

So, your solution is to combat one teaching which you believe is hurting people by hurting people?

OK, I see.

[ILG]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

So, your solution is to combat one teaching which you believe is hurting people by hurting people?

OK, I see.

Who am I hurting by discussing the issue and quoting a published booklet and saying I disagree?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by ILG

Who am I hurting by discussing the issue and quoting a published booklet and saying I disagree?

But isn't that what everyone says? You see ILG you won't consider what you do is the same as your so called opposition is doing. You have entered a website which is supposed to cater to one religious group. You have come out of that religious group, and now are on a mission to liberate those who you view as disagreeing with you. You have young people, new converts who are still in this religious group. Some are "teenagers" who have parents who are trying to have their children follow them in the path they believe is Christian, being the UPC. You come along from your UPCI hater forum on facebook and start to rant solely concerning the UPC, and their material. But, instead of the Forum being entitled "Apostolic Foes Forum" or "Reasons why I Hate the UPCI part 3", or "I Had a Really Bad Experience, So, Share My Pain."

Somebody gets hurt.

Because after all, they didn't expect this place to be a venus fly trap.


But what about a father who tries to stop his 13 year old daughter from reading your material? But he can't because she has issues not only with religion, but with her own thoughts and feelings? Hey, parents can stop their young people from coming here, and even stop them from getting on the internet.

But what if you are wrong?

You just thumbed up a post with a John Chrysostom, Henry Alford? Yet, if you know anything about these two individuals they believed a woman was to let her hair to grow unhindered. Also, you wouldn't of been able to live in a church setting with either of these guys.

Jerome? He interpreted the Latin Vulgate.

Do you know how he interpreted 1 Corinthians 11:15? He uses nutriat not the varmint that people put in Gumbo, but the Latin word which we get the English nutrition? The Latin nutriat means to nourish, grow, to nurse a baby. English speakers get tangled (no pun intended) because we see the word "long" and therefore create a discussion concerning what is "long?" The Spanish Bible interpretations especially the Reina Valera use the word "crecer" which simply means to GROW. So, 1 Corinthians 11:15 simply means that if a woman grows her hair it is a glory unto her showing her submission.

That easy.

But what if you are wrong? I know, I know, you can flip it around and ask me the same thing. But, what if YOU are wrong?

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

You just thumbed up a post with a John Chrysostom, Henry Alford? Yet, if you know anything about these two individuals they believed a woman was to let her hair to grow unhindered. Also, you wouldn't of been able to live in a church setting with either of these guys.

I'd be interested in seeing the references on this.

Jerome? He interpreted the Latin Vulgate.

Do you know how he interpreted 1 Corinthians 11:15? He uses nutriat not the varmint that people put in Gumbo, but the Latin word which we get the English nutrition? The Latin nutriat means to nourish, grow, to nurse a baby. English speakers get tangled (no pun intended) because we see the word "long" and therefore create a discussion concerning what is "long?" The Spanish Bible interpretations especially the Reina Valera use the word "crecer" which simply means to GROW. So, 1 Corinthians 11:15 simply means that if a woman grows her hair it is a glory unto her showing her submission.

A woman's hair never stops growing. Therefore it is a fitting example demonstrating that even nature itself agrees with Paul's position that a woman should be veiled (I Corinthians 11:5-6, 13). I don't see a mandate for uncut hair. There is only the admonition for women to be veiled in church gatherings, which was a cultural expression of modesty at the time. Thus the heart of the issue is that immodest women shame their heads (their husbands). A loving and submitted Christian wife will love and honor her husband by being modest in her appearance.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Aquila

I'd be interested in seeing the references on this.



A woman's hair never stops growing. Therefore it is a fitting example demonstrating that even nature itself agrees with Paul's position that a woman should be veiled (I Corinthians 11:5-6, 13). I don't see a mandate for uncut hair. There is only the admonition for women to be veiled in church gatherings, which was a cultural expression of modesty at the time. Thus the heart of the issue is that immodest women shame their heads (their husbands). A loving and submitted Christian wife will love and honor her husband by being modest in her appearance.

It would probably be beneficial to the conversation to list any other cultural expressions in the NT that are not practiced today. Can you list any?

[Amanah]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

But isn't that what everyone says? You see ILG you won't consider what you do is the same as your so called opposition is doing. You have entered a website which is supposed to cater to one religious group. You have come out of that religious group, and now are on a mission to liberate those who you view as disagreeing with you. You have young people, new converts who are still in this religious group. Some are "teenagers" who have parents who are trying to have their children follow them in the path they believe is Christian, being the UPC. You come along from your UPCI hater forum on facebook and start to rant solely concerning the UPC, and their material. But, instead of the Forum being entitled "Apostolic Foes Forum" or "Reasons why I Hate the UPCI part 3", or "I Had a Really Bad Experience, So, Share My Pain."

Somebody gets hurt.

Because after all, they didn't expect this place to be a venus fly trap.


But what about a father who tries to stop his 13 year old daughter from reading your material? But he can't because she has issues not only with religion, but with her own thoughts and feelings? Hey, parents can stop their young people from coming here, and even stop them from getting on the internet.

But what if you are wrong?

You just thumbed up a post with a John Chrysostom, Henry Alford? Yet, if you know anything about these two individuals they believed a woman was to let her hair to grow unhindered. Also, you wouldn't of been able to live in a church setting with either of these guys.

Jerome? He interpreted the Latin Vulgate.

Do you know how he interpreted 1 Corinthians 11:15? He uses nutriat not the varmint that people put in Gumbo, but the Latin word which we get the English nutrition? The Latin nutriat means to nourish, grow, to nurse a baby. English speakers get tangled (no pun intended) because we see the word "long" and therefore create a discussion concerning what is "long?" The Spanish Bible interpretations especially the Reina Valera use the word "crecer" which simply means to GROW. So, 1 Corinthians 11:15 simply means that if a woman grows her hair it is a glory unto her showing her submission.

That easy.

But what if you are wrong? I know, I know, you can flip it around and ask me the same thing. But, what if YOU are wrong?

I agree. When the majority of Oneness Apostolics hold to standards that they believe are biblical, what honorable intent can there be in bombarding a forum with the purpose of trying to discredit those standards? to see people leave the UPC and other Oneness orgs? and go where? be set adrift to backslide?

Even if you think the standards are based on misinterpretation of scripture, all you have is women who are dressing modestly and looking like women.

[TakingDominion]

Originally Posted by Amanah

I agree. When the majority of Oneness Apostolics hold to standards that they believe are biblical, what honorable intent can there be in bombarding a forum with the purpose of trying to discredit those standards? to see people leave the UPC and other Oneness orgs? and go where? be set adrift to backslide?

Even if you think the standards are based on misinterpretation of scripture, all you have is women who are dressing modestly and looking like women.

Very, very good point.