Read Segraves on "letting down hair"

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Michael Phelps

Is this what Jesus would do?

I was thinking the same thing.

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Michael Phelps

Is this what Jesus would do?

I wonder if Jesus would continually call him young and immature like some here have been doing...

Just sayin when you point a finger at someone else you always have 3 pointing back at you

[Admin]

Ooops, too late Bob Dylan.

Once written, the words are still there for Admin to read.

[RandyWayne]

Originally Posted by jfrog

I wonder if Jesus would continually call him young and immature like some here have been doing...

Just sayin when you point a finger at someone else you always have 3 pointing back at you

I usually only have 1.2 pointing back at me, on average.

[BobDylan]

Originally Posted by dizzyde

This is what I am saying!

Also, he has apparently spent waaaaay to much time alone with a thesaurus... although I am not quite sure that he has all the definitions down correctly...

Originally Posted by dizzyde

One of the reasons I would be REALLY interested in knowing who he is, I have a strong feeling that he has another identity around here. And his motivation is really murky, can't quite get a handle on it.

Originally Posted by Michael Phelps

My guess is that Bob Dylan is a relatively young man who thinks he knows it all. Furthermore, he probably feels that its a disgrace to admit that he is wrong, so now he's working on this incredibly ridiculous defense of the indefensible just so he won't have to admit his error.

This is a sign of someone who is not quite confident enough with their own knowledge to be able to say "You're right, I'm wrong".

Hopefully, one day he'll get there, because one cannot be a great leader without the ability to admit that you may be mistaken.

Originally Posted by dizzyde

Going by what we have seen here, I would guess that day is a looooong time coming, if it ever does arrive!

Originally Posted by BobDylan

You're admitting your own feelings of insufficiency... You may be a little intimidated attempting to converse with someone who uses a more extensive vocabulary than yourself. Do you personally identify with the necessity of having writing aids at your immediate access? It's alright, I sympathize with your plight, although not all of us need thesauri to speak, or write, at a higher level. The fact that you're "not quite sure" whether or not I "have all the definitions down correctly" certainly speaks more about yourself than it does about me! Good try though.. I will at least commend you for your effort here! Keep it up, you'll get better!

This is my response to Dizzy where you said I was trying to "make her look like an idiot". I was not arbitrarily doing that, but this post was simply a response to several previous posts she levelled toward me. Just trying to put this into perspective of the bigger picture...

Originally Posted by Michael Phelps

Add to my initial assessment of Bob Dylan a hearty dose of arrogance and superiority.

You have a lot to learn, my friend. Deflection of your own shortcomings with personal attacks on Dizzy's intelligence reveals your inner feelings of inferiority and uncertainty of your own belief.

From the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks.........we would all love to help you, but you're not allowing yourself to be helped.

So we all just have to sit back and watch the train as it speeds toward the abutment..........

Originally Posted by Michael Phelps

You are absolutely correct, BD. Notice that the posts you quoted were made AFTER you tried to make Dizzy look like an idiot.
At that point, I saw your true nature emerge, and that's when I made these posts. Before that point, I only had issue with your ridiculous preoccupation to defend an indefensible position stated by a man who has obviously taken leave of his senses, at least in the HMH realm.

When YOU made it personal with Diz, that's when I realized that you are a very immature young man who feels that its a disgrace to admit that you are wrong, and even my posts you reference above are directed at certain character traits that I hope time will eliminate from your personality. I don't think you're a lost cause.

I'm sure you're a fine young man with lots of potential, and I don't think you're malicious - I just think you're immature, i.e., the threats to make me look like a pretzel........statements like this remind me of a sixth grader posturing on the play ground. Not adults discussing issues in a mature fashion.

Hang in there, BD! You'll get your bell rung a few times by a few more "seasoned" opponents, but if you'll learn from it, you'll get thru this!

Ok Phelps, I didn't just arbitrarily "try to make Dizzy look like an idiot". I responded specifically to a deameanor she was displaying toward me in her posts. Using the multiquote function, I have identified the specific posts Dizzy made that I responded to that you are saying "I tried to make Dizzy look like an idiot" in chrolonological order. My response was a reprisal, because the conversation, if you can call it that, had already deteriorated because of the way Dizzy was posting. I am not doing this to say "she started this", but to point out the consistency of my MO in "matching rhetoric". If a person handles my arguments, I will be as respectful as I can... if they want to get in the mud, I am well able to do that as well... I personally prefer reasonable dilague to just mud slinging... BUT, a little good ol' fashioned food fight is fun now and then, until you have to clean up afterwards, which is what we're trying to do now! "Unfortunately"...

Phelps, if you had started directing your comments toward me reasonably, you and I wouldn't be having problems now. As I already showed, you made very marked personal "swipes" toward me, which I have handily responded to, which you didn't like. Again, I'll restate my MO, I WILL match the rhetoric directed toward me... respect with respecfulness, consideration with consideration, snipes and swipes with reprisal! Whether or not the Lord would do that specifically the way I would really isn't the issue... this is the way I do it. Good thing you are trying to be His disciple, and not mine! lol....

[RandyWayne]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

This makes me so stinking mad, I want to choke whoever started this mess! LOL!

And those who continue to support it....
Figuratively of course. I wouldn't literally choke someone over it.
"LS said it but didn't mean it that way. This lady obviously should have known better then to take him as face value."

[BobDylan]

Originally Posted by Admin

Ooops, too late Bob Dylan.

Once written, the words are still there for Admin to read.

What's that about? lol... I didn't say anything unwarranted! I had noticed jfrog had already taken up for me, so I decided to withdraw from that aspect of the conversation! My appreciation to jfrog for the support!

[Michael Phelps]

Originally Posted by BobDylan

This is my response to Dizzy where you said I was trying to "make her look like an idiot". I was not arbitrarily doing that, but this post was simply a response to several previous posts she levelled toward me. Just trying to put this into perspective of the bigger picture...





Ok Phelps, I didn't just arbitrarily "try to make Dizzy look like an idiot". I responded specifically to a deameanor she was displaying toward me in her posts. Using the multiquote function, I have identified the specific posts Dizzy made that I responded to that you are saying "I tried to make Dizzy look like an idiot" in chrolonological order. My response was a reprisal, because the conversation, if you can call it that, had already deteriorated because of the way Dizzy was posting. I am not doing this to say "she started this", but to point out the consistency of my MO in "matching rhetoric". If a person handles my arguments, I will be as respectful as I can... if they want to get in the mud, I am well able to do that as well... I personally prefer reasonable dilague to just mud slinging... BUT, a little good ol' fashioned food fight is fun now and then, until you have to clean up afterwards, which is what we're trying to do now! "Unfortunately"...

Phelps, if you had started directing your comments toward me reasonably, you and I wouldn't be having problems now. As I already showed, you made very marked personal "swipes" toward me, which I have handily responded to, which you didn't like. Again, I'll restate my MO, I WILL match the rhetoric directed toward me... respect with respecfulness, consideration with consideration, snipes and swipes with reprisal! Whether or not the Lord would do that specifically the way I would really isn't the issue... this is the way I do it. Good thing you are trying to be His disciple, and not mine! lol....

Sorry, BD, I'm not going to play anymore. You've so handily humiliated me with your wit and retort that I'm shamefully hiding my head in shame.

But, let me just offer up a slight explanation of why I asked if "Jesus would respond this way". One of my pet peeves with religion is that people can get on a soap box and heartily defend one of their "truths", but do so in a way that is in direct violation of a very plain principle in the Word of God. But, that's ok, because they don't have to follow Jesus, they just have to follow their tradition. That's the point I was trying to make.

You vociferously defend LS and his propogation of this "doctrine", and yet you brag about the fact that you'll repay with an "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" mindset, instead of following the words of Jesus and turning the other cheek.

I apologize that I used you for a public display of such incongruity, but it was just so convenient!

And, jfrog, you are correct. Jesus probably wouldn't be doing what I'm doing. The difference is, I'm not trying to defend a ridiculous anti-scriptural heresy. You wouldn't find Jesus doing that in the first place, so the point is somewhat irrelevant.

However, when conversing with the Pharisees, how did Jesus handle it? Go find some scriptural references, they're really quite interesting!

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by RandyWayne

And those who continue to support it....
Figuratively of course. I wouldn't literally choke someone over it.
"LS said it but didn't mean it that way. This lady obviously should have known better then to take him as face value."

LOL! Of course, "figuratively" choke someone would be correct. Although, I have an excellent visual for those that will NOT listen. LOL!

Randy,
This teaching is just very subtle. I wish I could express it the way it is coming across. When I made the remark that our "power" was in Jesus Christ and not our hair, the person almost rolled their eyes. Her thinking is this: First, she was thinking I was not raised in the UPC, so I cannot quite possibly understand. Second, because of her obedience, her long, uncut hair gives her power with God.

Our obedience to love, modesty, submitting ourselves one to another, time in prayer, reading His Word etc., etc., brings the same results. The end result is that we must have the fruit of the spirit manifested in our lives or nothing else is going to make a hill of beans.

The problem is that they are using the word for "power - dunamis, miraculous power" from the Book of Acts and they don't realize they are doing this.

DKB simply and correctly defines that as "authority". The things we know about angels:

1. They are reapers at the end of the world - Matt 13:39

2. They are ministering spirits sent by God. Matt 8:10; Hebrews 1:14

I look at Matt 8:10 which says that children have angels. It says that the angels behold the face of God every day. That means, to me, that even if a child has an angel watching over them, they can do nothing without God's direction.

3. We understand that angels were cast out of heaven because of their rebellion. Jude 1:6; II Peter 2:4

4. That they desire to look into our salvation. I Peter 1:12

That means that, IMO, the only significance of angels in I Cor 11 is that they are looking into our salvation and seeing that we are instructed to keep divine order.

The significance of the long hair is simply gender distinction which is important to God. He makes that plain in many areas of the Bible.

Many women that I am acquainted with feel that trimming their ends is in keeping with the long hair. You don't have to do that very often and your hair looks long and very neat. It makes no sense to look like a hag in order to have long hair. But, I digress...... lol

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

It makes no sense to look like a hag in order to have long hair. But, I digress...... lol

- - you would swat at CC1 for saying this! But, I digress.....lol!