Holiness Is Still Important - Page 23

*AQuietPlace* · #**221** 05-26-2010, 09:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by proudfather

You didn't answer my question about make up. Nice side step. Culture and context are important, but was Paul addressing women that had shaved their head because of their culture? He wasn't just speaking to Jewish people you know.

Lol. He wasn't side-stepping the makeup question. It's been discussed extensively around here.

(it struck me funny recently when watching an old episode of Gunsmoke that it was the "harlots" that wore big, huge feathers in their hair, and had the fancy, curly hairdos.

)

proudfather · #**222** 05-26-2010, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace*

Lol. He wasn't side-stepping the makeup question. It's been discussed extensively around here.

(it struck me funny recently when watching an old episode of Gunsmoke that it was the "harlots" that wore big, huge feathers in their hair, and had the fancy, curly hairdos.

)

I wouldn't know about that. I haven't watched that show.

192281 · #**223** 05-26-2010, 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by proudfather

I wouldn't know about that. I haven't watched that show.

Put you do know what the post is getting at.

proudfather · #**224** 05-26-2010, 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 192281

Put you do know what the post is getting at.

Oh yes, but remember...this is about "culture" and "context".

edjen01 · #**225** 05-26-2010, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by proudfather

BTW, Jesus said "He that believeth AND is baptized shall be saved." Does He have to spell EVERYTHING out for you before you will obey? I return to the teaching of Moses and the teachings of Paul. Did the Israelites question Moses when he came down off the mount? He simply said, "This is what God said" and they replied, "We will obey". Imagine that...they took him at his word. Regardless of when Paul's letter was written, the fact remains that his words are scripture. The churches took him at his word. They knew that he was inspired by the Holy Ghost. Do you deny that he was inspired by God when he wrote the letters? Be very careful with your answer...

when it comes to eternal matters...I like to be absolute. I guess I'm goofy like that.

I do not deny the inspiration of Holy Spirit. I even believe some who write on this very site have been inspired by the Holy Spirit to write things. But when we remove context, audiance, and attemp to create foundational doctrines without proper interpretation & understanding...bad things happen. Easy example...the words "then he went away and hanged himself"(Matt.27:5.NIV) are scripture also...but I don't believe you, me, or everyone named Judas should do that. Are we being disobediant...NO...because we understand the context.

To ignor good hermeneutics hurts the text and can cause great harm to believers.

When we look at the text...we understand that the Israelites did NOT want to talk with God directly...so they asked Moses to do this for them. But now we can have the Holy Spirit living in us...leading & guiding...Jesus called Him "the spirit of truth" so I don't have to have a Moses-type character talk to God for me...I can(and I believe should) do that for myself. Does this mean I disregard the teachings & life of Moses...NO...we can learn alot from them. But it also means we should understand that their time & place is different than ours.

I believe that St.Paul was an apostle of Jesus Christ and that he said and wrote many things that were inspired by the Holy Spirit. I do not believe that every letter/word he wrote was under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. I believe I have heard sermons that were inspired by God and given under the anointing of the Holy Spirit by people who I would call Apostles of Jesus Christ....do I then believe that every word that person speaks is inspired by God...not hardly.

*AQuietPlace* · #**226** 05-26-2010, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by proudfather

Oh yes, but remember...this is about "culture" and "context".

Now you're talking out of both sides of your mouth.

You're the one who wanted to use harlots to discuss makeup.

If makeup is wrong because harlots wore it, so is elaborate hair, hair do-dads, sheer stockings, high heels, etc. etc. etc.

proudfather · #**227** 05-26-2010, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace*

Now you're talking out of both sides of your mouth.

You're the one who wanted to use harlots to discuss makeup.

If makeup is wrong because harlots wore it, so is elaborate hair, hair do-dads, sheer stockings, high heels, etc. etc. etc.

Sigh...again, this was a joke. Please.

mfblume · #**228** 05-26-2010, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by proudfather

Please define long then. If Paul is not speaking about uncut hair, then how must we go about obeying this scripture? We must obey the scripture because:

2 Timothy 3:16 (New International Version)
16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,

So, what do you teach? Just curious.

It's rather simple. Long simply means an easily recognizable contrast where you can see a woman and see a man and simple say one has long hair and the other has short hair. Leave it there. No measurements. Just what would commonly known as long and short. A stark contrast. When it is too similar where there is no difference then it is out of order.

So we do obey this scripture, and the way I teach it is there is a distinct contrast, and people should be able to easily say that woman has long hair and that man has short hair.

But do not forget this reasoning:

If HAVE LONG HAIR in verse 14 is to remain with the same definition it has in verse 15, then a man cannot have "A" while a woman must have "A". "A" must be consistent in definition. Paul did not say it is a shame for a man to have "A", but if a woman has "B" it is a glory to her. HAVE LONG HAIR means the same thing for a man that it means for a woman.

That being the case, if LONG = UNCUT then a man does not "have long hair" if it is three feet down his back and he keeps it trimmed. It is not UNCUT.

*AQuietPlace* · #**229** 05-26-2010, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by proudfather

Sigh...again, this was a joke. Please.

But you'll agree that using harlots to condemn makeup isn't going to work?

proudfather · #**230** 05-26-2010, 10:04 AM

At this point I am the only cons. in this discussion. Either the other cons. have better things to do, or their too scared to say anything. I have done my best to answer questions, but so many are coming in at this point that I can't keep up with them. No wonder other cons. have left this forum. I will stick around, and hopefully my next post will be a little more popular. Someone has to close this discussion so I will bow out gracefully. While I could answer all of the questions posted, I don't really see the point. We've all made up our minds about what we believe. Thanks for the debate though. It was fun.